|
Post by Van Plexico on Apr 4, 2006 14:17:40 GMT -5
Any thoughts about NEW AVENGERS: ILLUMINATI, the one-shot this past week?
I just read it yesterday. A typical Bendis book-- a committee meeting. Lots of people sitting around, having a conversation. (Where did he learn to write superhero comics, anyway? They're the equivalent of a Jay & Silent Bob movie script-- lots of "clever" chitchat and not much else!)
A few somewhat interesting moments, sure. I was surprised to learn that Iron Man, in his old '70s armor, could go ten rounds with Namor, but in his new, high-tech armor, Namor rips his helmet off in like two seconds. Yeah. Right. (I mean, I'll go along with the Marvel conceit that underwater, Namor is unbeatable, but still, it should have taken longer than that.)
I have no idea what Black Bolt was "saying" at the end.
This would have worked nicely as separate pieces, within other comics. Taken all as one book, it just strikes me as silly.
And let me add one thing-- I was glad for the explanation as to why Tony sees the legislation the way he does. It doesn't completely click for me, yet, based on what is said in this issue. But it makes more sense than just saying Tony would automatically go along with the government on some ridiculous anti-civil-rights legislation. And I feel better to see Reed on his side, too. I will probably end up on Cap's side (which pains me, as a fan of Shellhead), but I did want to know why Tony would take the opposite side. His explanation almost, almost makes a little sense...
|
|
|
Post by Black Knight on Apr 4, 2006 15:39:23 GMT -5
Yea, the illuminate was almost good, then I remembered that this group was only created last year, retconed poorly into marvel history only to be disbanded now. It made me just throw my hands up and think what is the point behind this crap anymore.
|
|
|
Post by thew40 on Apr 4, 2006 20:41:49 GMT -5
Can't anyone enjoy anything?! It's called "Civil War." Duh. And did you hate "Avengers Forever," blackknight? Because Lord knows there weren't any retcons in there. Why do you guys take this stuff so personaly? Character changes, storylines, or anything that you guys disagree with, you all feel the need to insult the creators, immediately bash everything about the books you claim to love, and even when you (as blackknight put it) say it "was almost good," you go on about stupid it is. Here's my big beef: I've been reading X-Men titles for 14 years. I have nearly every issue from Uncanny 150 up, as well as a full run of X-Men. But what's the difference between me and you? I can accept change. I can look at a storyline that I don't like and still look for the good in it. You don't. You look for the bad and tear it apart. Not only that, but you insult the creator. You talk about him like he's not even a real person. You know what? I came here because I like the Avengers. Because I've been reading the Avengers since Busiek came on board. I figured, "well, here's a nice website, I wonder if I could talk to them about how I feel about Avengers and Civil War and House of M." What do I find? You guys acting like you know better than anyone else, arrogantly dismissing comics that aren't written by people that stopped writing comics years ago. You guys love to bash Bendis because he didn't read every single d**n issue of "Avengers." When was the last time YOU did that? And he "ignores continunity?" Hmm. Guess you guys missed out on "Avengers Finale," which certainly does not show any of Avengers history. It's not the 60s, 70s, 80s, or 90s anymore. For goodness sake, TRY AND LIKE COMICS AGAIN! Open your minds for once and stop comparing it to the old books where they were bogged down by decades of continunity, annoying captions, and over-dramatized thought balloons! ~W~
|
|
|
Post by dlw66 on Apr 5, 2006 7:45:42 GMT -5
Hmmm... a Civil War brewing in our own midst. I think what we have here is a generation gap.
W -- by your post, I am assuming you are a child of the 90's; that is, you were "socialized" in jr. and sr. high school during that period. As such, if I can continue to assume, you were raised on comics that were more art driven than story driven, with a gritty "dark" feel to them where often story elements were introduced with profit as the motivation rather than consumer care.
I, as well as several others in this AA.us community, were raised in the 70's and early 80's, when comics seemed to care more about their history. I remember the excitement when an old villain would pop up, or when a crossover "just because" (not to stimulate sales for another book) was a neat thing. I am sad that in order for many of us almost-40-somethings to regain that spark it has to be through reprints (Essentials, Archives, Masterworks, tpb's) or through limited series with "Untold Tales" in the title. I think many of us just want to feel like the companies care about us and not only about the bottom line -- and before that gets jumped on, I am an economics teacher and understand that yes, they are running a profit-motivated business.
So, allow us to be a little grumpy -- some of us read and take it for what it's worth, others vent openly. That's what a forum is. I thought you defended your point-of-view very well, and I agree that we sometimes get a little whiny here. Let's all enjoy the point/counterpoint, and keep loving the Avengers (past or hopefully present/future).
|
|
|
Post by Black Knight on Apr 5, 2006 7:55:57 GMT -5
Can't anyone enjoy anything?! It's called "Civil War." Duh. And did you hate "Avengers Forever," blackknight? Because Lord knows there weren't any retcons in there. Why do you guys take this stuff so personaly? Character changes, storylines, or anything that you guys disagree with, you all feel the need to insult the creators, immediately bash everything about the books you claim to love, and even when you (as blackknight put it) say it "was almost good," you go on about stupid it is. Here's my big beef: I've been reading X-Men titles for 14 years. I have nearly every issue from Uncanny 150 up, as well as a full run of X-Men. But what's the difference between me and you? I can accept change. I can look at a storyline that I don't like and still look for the good in it. You don't. You look for the bad and tear it apart. Not only that, but you insult the creator. You talk about him like he's not even a real person. You know what? I came here because I like the Avengers. Because I've been reading the Avengers since Busiek came on board. I figured, "well, here's a nice website, I wonder if I could talk to them about how I feel about Avengers and Civil War and House of M." What do I find? You guys acting like you know better than anyone else, arrogantly dismissing comics that aren't written by people that stopped writing comics years ago. You guys love to bash Bendis because he didn't read every single d**n issue of "Avengers." When was the last time YOU did that? And he "ignores continunity?" Hmm. Guess you guys missed out on "Avengers Finale," which certainly does not show any of Avengers history. It's not the 60s, 70s, 80s, or 90s anymore. For goodness sake, TRY AND LIKE COMICS AGAIN! Open your minds for once and stop comparing it to the old books where they were bogged down by decades of continunity, annoying captions, and over-dramatized thought balloons! ~W~ First, it is not about the retcon, although that was done poorly, it is the fact that the group was set up simple to be disbanded for CW. Pointless... Second, I love change, but change for the sake of change is pointless. And that is what Marvel has been doing. They are throwing out the baby with the bath water.
|
|
|
Post by dlw66 on Apr 5, 2006 8:08:46 GMT -5
I read this book last night. I agree mostly with Van's assessment. But, I am happy that at least I now know what Civil War is going to be about.
Is it me, or (like I've said elsewhere on these boards) is there a lot of overlap/re-do's on story elements here? Haven't the Ultimates already done a similar thing with the Hulk, and hasn't the superhero registration been done in the mutant books and in DC's books as well?
I thought Namor was a complete ass.
|
|
|
Post by Shiryu on Apr 5, 2006 9:12:02 GMT -5
Come on Thew40, it's nothing personal, just different opinions. Most people here are fond of the classic Avengers and as such we don't appreciate much the present run, that's it. We wouldn't be buying the Avengers if we didn't like the comics anymore. As for the Illuminati, it's going to be months before it arrives in Italy. Can anyone post or private message me a spoiler / summary please ?
|
|
|
Post by von Bek on Apr 5, 2006 9:59:26 GMT -5
The problem with this "Iluminatti" concept is that in their first meeting is stands clear that they won´t be a big conspiracy or anything, just some superheroes changing information among themselves. So, what was the big deal? Send the Hulk to space? In Bill Mantlo´s run Dr. Strange already send him to another dimension (I think it is even adressed in the one shot).
So why should we care? Not to start another BMB bash or anything, but like in many Bendis books he tries to stablish a 'feeling' that something meaningful and important is happening, but nothing is really happening.
And I agree with Van Plexico that Namor couldn´t have defeated IM so easy (c´mon even underwater he´s not that powerfull)...
And no idea whhat Blackbolt was trying to say. Gaydos art was ok in Alias, but he is not the right artist for this kind of one shot.
|
|
|
Post by dlw66 on Apr 5, 2006 10:38:23 GMT -5
Anyone have a problem with Iron Man just suggesting that Xavier read Black Bolt's mind, without first asking permission from BB himself who is sitting right there?? I think previously Charles had said of a similar request that that wasn't what he was all about.
Also, help me out on this -- in the Kree/Skrull War era, was Iron Man Avengers chair?
What did you think of the SHIELD agent's take on the heroes being responsible for the villain's death toll (ie Spider-Man bearing responsibility for Osborns killings because Spidey never killed off the Goblin)?
|
|
|
Post by thew40 on Apr 5, 2006 16:01:43 GMT -5
W -- by your post, I am assuming you are a child of the 90's; that is, you were "socialized" in jr. and sr. high school during that period. As such, if I can continue to assume, you were raised on comics that were more art driven than story driven, with a gritty "dark" feel to them where often story elements were introduced with profit as the motivation rather than consumer care. To an extent, yes. I got into comics in 1992 and have been reading them ever since. That being said, I have always enjoyed the story more than the artwork. I never read Image or DC and was mostly a Marvel zombie up until 1999 or so. I was never a fan of the darker or gritty elements. I can certainly understand this POV. Maybe I should make myself a little clearer: I love comics with a lot of history. I love continunity, I love stories that refer back to other stories. But at the same time, I also understand that comics sometimes need to not mention (and yeah, ignore or retcon) that history so as to not to scare off new or potential customers. Hence one of the reasons "New Avengers" was created. Using the same logic that made "New X-Men" such a critical and sales success, Marvel shook things up, made it "new," and even restarted it to help gather more readers. Thank you, though, for actually talking to me in a civilized fashion. I was expecting to get iBashed for my last post. Grumpy and whiny, I've got no problem with. My problem is that no one seems to like any of the current titles right now and has to nitpick like crazy. And then, complain about it and act like they've been personally insulted. I came to this forum because I really like what's been happening in "New Avengers." I know that people have a problem with the way that Bendis likes to drag things out, but having read "Daredevil," "Powers," and "Ultimate Spider-Man" I knew that it was going to be that way. (You should really try and read it all at once some time, because it makes the story read so much better) Anyways, I hoping that I could get some insight from other fans. All I have found is pure and complete negativism. Even on your main page, you bash Bendis. All they're doing is trying something different to attracht new readers. While I agree with you there, I think that change is sometimes needed to (1) bring is sales and (2) to open new, creative doors for the book and its related titles. I'm sorry I got so aggressive, but I've never seen so much negativitiy towards a comic that people claim to love. I mean, I feel like I'm the only one who's really loving all this. Am I? Am I the only one who enjoys "New Avengers?" Am I the only one who loves "Nextwave?" Was I the only person to join who thought that "House of M" was awesome? Am I the only poster that is really, really looking forward to "Civil War?" If that's the case, then I may just depart from this forum. ~W~
|
|
|
Post by dlw66 on Apr 5, 2006 20:28:11 GMT -5
Thanks for taking the time to respond point by point. This is a good conversation.
As far as your last series of questions, let me address some with a little background. I used to buy a lot of comics, really from when I started reading at the age of 5 or 6 (around 1971-72) until the big implosion in the late 90's. Part of the reason I cut back was economic -- these $2.99 price tags are tough when you consider that I could get four for a dollar when I started!! That, and just not being able to commit $30-40 each month with a family. The other reason I cut back was that I was tired of the direction things were going -- crossovers out the wazoo, darkness for the sake of darkness, characters behaving in ways heroes shouldn't, etc. I simply couldn't follow X-Men anymore with all of the new characters, and the Spider-Clone thing just really ticked me off (and I am very much opposed to Norman Osborn even being alive -- for someone who read that "new" back in '74 or whatever, it had great closure then and should never have been messed with). So, to be honest, I see New Avengers more in the light of the recent stuff than in the vein of the classics.
I do not read Nextwave, and couldn't tell you square one about it.
I figured I might catch House of M in tpb form, if it was recommended to me. So far no one has, so I am assuming I didn't miss much.
Civil War? Ehhhh..... we'll see. Not sure I'll go out of my way.
But, please don't leave because I'm stuck in the 80's (or 60's, or 70's). Shoot, you should listen to my music! And VH1 Classic is one of my favorite channels!!!!
|
|
|
Post by Shiryu on Apr 6, 2006 9:09:57 GMT -5
I generally agree with dlw66 and Black Knight, meaning I don't mind changes too much as long as they make sense to me (I too was disappointed when Osborn was showed to be alive and well, his death had been a very important point in Spidey's history). This doesn't mean that changes have to be bad no matter what, or the books would be dead boring. My complaint with Bendis is that I feel he doesn't properly justify some points (like Stark saying he doesn't have the money to rebuild the Mansion and then providing Quinjet after Quinjet for the team. I would have preferred him saying that the rebuilding of the mansion was in process, that it would take a lot of time, and that, in the meantime, the team would have lived in the skycraper). Having said that, one of my jobs involves outlining the plot holes in tv series and books, so I'm rather picky on this subject matter As for your questions, I didn't like HoM and I'm not sure I'm enjoying NA, but I am looking forward for Civil War, hoping that the points it presents are justified properly. However in the Bendis pool, a few people did say they are enjoying his run, so you are not alone out there
|
|
|
Post by dlw66 on Apr 6, 2006 10:51:49 GMT -5
I feel one of the major drawbacks to comics writing today is the current trend that every story has to be neatly tied up at the end of 5-6 issues so that it can be packaged in a trade paperback. Say what you will about John Byrne, but that man could tell a story back in his day. With his style of foreshadowing, he could actually spin 3-4 tales in one book, and not resolve things for several issues. That is writing -- that's what makes you want to come back. Subplots, etc.
The other thing I feel is lacking today is that, as said earlier, change these days is more for shock value and less for what I'll call evolution. Scott and Jean get married, Peter and Mary Jane get married, Gwen Stacy dies, the bad guys invade Avengers Mansion -- those are big events yes, but they are also real life events that many of us can relate to on our own level. Each of those events and many others serve to add layers onto the continuity of a fictional person's life. The original Dark Phoenix saga was spectacular because here was this woman we thought we knew, and gradually Claremont and Byrne (and I mean gradually -- she became Phoenix in X-Men 101 and Dark Phoenix ended in 138 -- 3 years!!) slipped us details that all was not right with Jean Grey. The climax of the story was energetic and real, it was eagerly looked-forward to, and it was satisfying. Some of today's stuff just seems like fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants writing.
|
|
|
Post by Black Knight on Apr 6, 2006 10:58:49 GMT -5
First I would like to thank thew40 for responding in a very thoughtful manner. An excellent post even if I disagree with some of it. Let me tackle you questions from my point of view. 1) Am I the only one who enjoys "New Avengers?" Well when I first heard of disassembled and that Bendis was writting the comic, I was excited. I had loved Alias and thought that Bendis could really give a great new spin on the classic team. Then I found out that Bendis was disassembling the team, and my excitment droped a little, but I thought hey this could be good, some freash blood mingled with some classics. Then I found out who was on the new team, and my first impression was "cash-cow". I was very disappointed, but I thought I will give it a try. Then it took 6 issues just to form part of the team, and the whole team has never truly formed as they have never done anything with all the members. The ideas that Bendis has seem great, but the excution of them are slow and plodding and subplots are droped only to be picked up in different books. I truly wanted to love NA as I have loved the Avengers since I started reading comics back in 1978, but I just found that for the reason lisited above I just can't. 2)Am I the only one who loves "Nextwave?" We have discussed Nextwave on that website. I think we should just agree to disagree on it. 3) Was I the only person to join who thought that "House of M" was awesome? The idea behind HOM was flawed from the beginning just like Disassembled as it was all based on the SW being crazy because of her kids. That problem had been handled several years ago, however Bendis ignored those comics. Besides that the idea of reducing mutants has certainly lead to some interesting stories, but the comic itself could have been told in two issue. Once again decompression ruined it for me. 4) Am I the only poster that is really, really looking forward to "Civil War?" I am looking forward to it, but not really, really looking forward to it. It could be good, I just hope that it lives up to the hype unlike HOM. Again thanks for the great responce.
|
|
|
Post by thew40 on Apr 7, 2006 0:40:53 GMT -5
Wow. Lotsa points here. Let's see what I can cover.
First of all, thanks to all you guys for responding with both respect and honesty. Maybe I was just seeing the worst of this site and based any and all assumption on that.
dlw66:
I can understand that and I guess because I've only been reading new comics since '92 (when all the darker elements started becoming trendy), I don't see it like that. However, I think we've left the "grim and gritty" 90's behind in favor of newer, more experimental approaches. And even those have been reigned in over the past 2-3 years.
And don't get me started on Norman Osborn being alive or the Spider-Clone (shudder).
There's a big reason for this. Next time you go to your local book store (I'm talking Barnes & Noble, Book-A-Million, or Borders), check out the graphic novel section. You will find TONS of Manga. And the fact of the matter is, the Manga section is growing a little bit everyday. The logic is that if Marvel and DC start pumping out trades of their current books (with the stories written to fit into them), they'll start catching the eyes of the kids buying up the Manga. Especially when a movie comes out.
The goal in mind is this: A Manga fan goes to the graphic novel section and checks out the Manga. As he/she is over there, they glance over at the regular-sized graphic novels and see a trade that features the X-Men, Spider-Man, Fantastic Four, Hulk, etc. They take a look at it and decide to buy it. It's good, so they start picking up the trades on a regular basis. Soon enough, they're going out to their local comic book store and picking up the issues on a monthly basis. And hopefully, they'll start to branch out from there . . .
Hence the lack major sub-plots. New, there are usually sub-plots running across various archs, but the reason they're not always addressed is (once more) the desire not to bog down the comic with too much history. People have a short attention span. But once they get into the comic, they start to see the sub-plots, start to get interested, and so on and so on.
Personally, I prefer long story archs, which is probably one of the reasons I like "New Avengers." We get time to set things up, to get some time with the characters, etc.
I'll half-agree with you here. There is still some natrual character evolution still occuring, but there's also too much shock value. But shocks bring in the customers.
shiryu:
and
blackknight:
I'm going to mostly agree with you guys here. I loved House of M and I'm really liking "New Avengers," but you're right when there is lack of logic AT TIMES. Also, seeing the whole team in action would be nice.
I didn't really quite understand why they didn't re-build the mansion. I think Stark Tower is neat and all (especially with Sentry's watchtower clocktower thing on top), but the mansion was where it's at. I mean, at least, they could have turned it into a museum or something . . .
As far as Scarlet Witch is concerned in both Disassembled and House of M, I felt like she was really shafted. With the exception of HoM # 1 and # 7, we never really got to see Wanda as a true character. Other than that, she was really just a plot device.
If you ask me, if they were going to have Wanda go nutso, then a better job should have been done at developing it.
That being said, I loved House of M for a number of reasons. I really liked the world that it showed: Mutants ruling the world, while humanity either struggles for equality or engages in terrorism. I also felt it was the next step in the "evolution" of the Magneto/Quicksilver/Scarlet Witch relationship - which was really what the core of the book was about.
I think, though, that in the end, House of M was more an X-Men story than an Avengers one. Decimation has been fantastic.
As far as New Avengers is concerned, it's a good book to me. I think it can be too slow and too subtle at times, but overall, I think it's fantastic. I'm looking forward to seeing who or what is behind the "rotting" of SHIELD and Hydra is (which I'm betting will be covered in "Civil War." I also like that we're seeing some new and interesting ideas, such as the visit to Detroit (as ironic as it was).
Good call. Dirk Anger is still my hero, though.
One thing I keep in mind is that Millar is way different that Bendis. Millar knows how to keep the pace moving, knows when decompression has reached its limit, and generally, knows how to keep the excitment going.
Also, he's reportedly been reading A LOT of comics in preparation for this project. He was sick (I'm not sure what, but it kept him in bed) for a few months, so he had a lot of time to read a lot of back issues.
Once more, thanks for the great replies. I did my best to cover my POV on the stuff you guys posted.
~W~
|
|
|
Post by Shiryu on Apr 7, 2006 7:37:21 GMT -5
This is a good point actually. I'm not much of a manga person (I only follow one, even though that's by far my favourite comic / cartoon ever, and it's where my nick comes from), but I must admit that, when going to the comics store here in the UK, my first look was for the paperback shelves, mainly for two reasons:
1) You know that the story actually starts in there
2) There is a better price / quantity ratio, meaning you can buy the equivalent of five issues and just pay 4 if you get a good deal.
I guess that paperbacks are good for those who don't regularly buy a book. They can become a starting point from going back to a series, or you can just get a single story arc and then forget about the whole book. However, they can be a bit of a pain for those following the book regularly, for the reasons listed in other topics above.
Maybe Marvel should expand the idea behind the paperback a bit, for example the Korvac saga has been nicely reprinted in a PB, but every chapter was very enjoyable because there were tons of things happening besides the Korvac plot. I think that should be the route to follow to get both old readers and newcomers.
|
|
|
Post by dlw66 on Apr 7, 2006 7:43:04 GMT -5
W --
You set the school record for longest post EVER!!!
|
|
|
Post by thew40 on Apr 7, 2006 8:17:19 GMT -5
I guess that paperbacks are good for those who don't regularly buy a book. They can become a starting point from going back to a series, or you can just get a single story arc and then forget about the whole book. However, they can be a bit of a pain for those following the book regularly, for the reasons listed in other topics above. Maybe Marvel should expand the idea behind the paperback a bit, for example the Korvac saga has been nicely reprinted in a PB, but every chapter was very enjoyable because there were tons of things happening besides the Korvac plot. I think that should be the route to follow to get both old readers and newcomers. I'd like to see that too. Actually, I'd love to see the Essentials line in color, printed on nicer paper for a few bucks more and not as many issues per trade. Also, I'd like to see Marvel experiment with this format. I'd love to see more original graphic novels. In fact, if Bendis were to write an OGN, I'd wonder if some of you guys would have a different reaction to his writing (ie, a lot more content rather than have the story laid out over months and months). Good points, by the way. dlw66 LOL! I love to write, what can I say? ~W~
|
|
|
Post by Black Knight on Apr 7, 2006 8:26:40 GMT -5
I guess that paperbacks are good for those who don't regularly buy a book. They can become a starting point from going back to a series, or you can just get a single story arc and then forget about the whole book. However, they can be a bit of a pain for those following the book regularly, for the reasons listed in other topics above. Maybe Marvel should expand the idea behind the paperback a bit, for example the Korvac saga has been nicely reprinted in a PB, but every chapter was very enjoyable because there were tons of things happening besides the Korvac plot. I think that should be the route to follow to get both old readers and newcomers. I'd like to see that too. Actually, I'd love to see the Essentials line in color, printed on nicer paper for a few bucks more and not as many issues per trade. Also, I'd like to see Marvel experiment with this format. I'd love to see more original graphic novels. In fact, if Bendis were to write an OGN, I'd wonder if some of you guys would have a different reaction to his writing (ie, a lot more content rather than have the story laid out over months and months). Good points, by the way. dlw66 LOL! I love to write, what can I say? ~W~ I actually like Alias in comic form so it is not that I dislike Bendis's writing as a whole, I just feel that he is not suited to writing action based Super-hero team comics, which NA should be. Also, I read USM Vol 1 Trade paper back. When I was done with the arc, my only thought was, yea that was good but it took bendis 6 issues to do what Stan Lee did in 1. Now don't get me wrong, I understand that he put more to the story, but when you look at it and realize that Uncle Ben was not even dead by the end of issue one, you know that Bendis is decompressing the story. I don't feel like reading a comic that feels more like I am watching Smallville I guess.
|
|
|
Post by von Bek on Apr 7, 2006 8:41:33 GMT -5
One of Bendis problems in NA is not the lack of action, but that the 'action' ia senseless and stupid. It´s like at the end of A:D, a bunch od superheroes fighting with no reason, many later explained as being Wanda´s 'creations'...
|
|
|
Post by Black Knight on Apr 7, 2006 9:03:34 GMT -5
One of Bendis problems in NA is not the lack of action, but that the 'action' ia senseless and stupid. It´s like at the end of A:D, a bunch od superheroes fighting with no reason, many later explained as being Wanda´s 'creations'... Hmmm, you are correct what action there is seems to be mostly senceless. Good point.
|
|
|
Post by dlw66 on Apr 7, 2006 9:19:29 GMT -5
One of the issues here is the way we read. I really think one of the reasons I had a falling out with many comics several years ago was that the stories became so a) convoluted, or b) silly that I was actually forgetting month to month what the heck was going on! I know that Marvel is wasting the first page of each comic on a rehashing of the previous month's events, but I actually like that sometimes! The tpb format does allow the reader to have a much better flow for the story. I do not buy Ulitmate Spider-Man monthly, but I love the trades because of just that.
|
|
|
Post by Black Knight on Apr 7, 2006 9:36:38 GMT -5
One of the issues here is the way we read. I really think one of the reasons I had a falling out with many comics several years ago was that the stories became so a) convoluted, or b) silly that I was actually forgetting month to month what the heck was going on! I know that Marvel is wasting the first page of each comic on a rehashing of the previous month's events, but I actually like that sometimes! The tpb format does allow the reader to have a much better flow for the story. I do not buy Ulitmate Spider-Man monthly, but I love the trades because of just that. I think the problem for me is that many of the books today are moving so slow, there feels like there is nothing going on. NA, Iron Man to name a few. I miss the break neck pass that made you go back and reread the comic for something you missed. Now I go back and reread the comic, looking to see if something actually happened. A way that I explained my problem was comparing a comic to a single episode of a TV show. Now that means you get one episode of that TV show a month, imagine if you got one episode of lost a month or one episode of 24. It would feel like the show and slowed to a crawl.
|
|
|
Post by dlw66 on Apr 7, 2006 12:53:19 GMT -5
Good comparison.
I will occasionally go back a couple of issues for a quick re-read. Sometimes I just get so frustrated with some of the new stuff that I don't bother.
For me, I used to think I "knew" these characters; now it seems like we've drifted apart...
hoo-boy! There's material for some psychoanalysis!!
|
|
|
Post by Black Knight on Apr 7, 2006 14:16:26 GMT -5
Good comparison. I will occasionally go back a couple of issues for a quick re-read. Sometimes I just get so frustrated with some of the new stuff that I don't bother. For me, I used to think I "knew" these characters; now it seems like we've drifted apart... hoo-boy! There's material for some psychoanalysis!! I understand what you mean though, it is like, what a min. I don't remember Cap acting like that. It feels like they are totally different charaters then they where even 3 years ago, with out any reason. Oh well, I am slowly learning that it is not my Marvel anymore, that they don't really care about the older fans all that much and are trying to cater to the "New Fan" that supposedly exists, even though the majority of comic buyers are inbetween 25-40.
|
|
|
Post by Avenger4Ever on Apr 7, 2006 20:02:02 GMT -5
Oh well, I am slowly learning that it is not my Marvel anymore, that they don't really care about the older fans all that much and are trying to cater to the "New Fan" that supposedly exists, even though the majority of comic buyers are inbetween 25-40. I couldn't have said it better myself. It's so sad but, true.
|
|
|
Post by imperiusrex on Apr 7, 2006 20:27:51 GMT -5
Oh well, I am slowly learning that it is not my Marvel anymore, that they don't really care about the older fans all that much and are trying to cater to the "New Fan" that supposedly exists, even though the majority of comic buyers are inbetween 25-40. I couldn't have said it better myself. It's so sad but, true. Count me amongst those as well. One point I really hate though is the concept of writing for "the trade." You're not writing for the trade, you're writing for the reader. If you can't write compelling individual chapters then you're not doing a good job. That's basic storytelling. If things get complex, have someone recap. A lot of writers do it brilliantly and if Shakespeare could do it, as well as Alan Moore and Frank Miller, so can Bendis and anyone else who is amongst the modern generation. There also seems to be a disdain for "old school" comics in the modern era and an attempt to give every hero feet of clay to the extreme. Yet for the most part, it's a repeat of the same motifs; an exploration of failure and inadequacy that are in their own way just as unreal as the clenched square jaws and iron rigid morals of the Justice Society. For example the interesting thing to me about Captain America is that in his heroic guise, he's untouchably perfect, yet Steve Rogers is a hopeless mess. When you start giving him the same doubts and failings as Spider Man in his heroic guise (as Bendis did in Disassembled where Cap seems completely over his head), he loses what makes him special. And as such it makes things just as unreal as a story from the 60s. In fact the heightened reality you find in many new comics, in my opinion, makes things rather boring. For example would the Star Wars movies have been better if someone had pointed out there's no sound in space and took the sound out to make it more real, or does that added unreal dimension add more than it takes away? That's part of my problem with Bendis. He makes his comics more real and as a result, they lose a lot of their energy and passion and yes, even fun. The Illuminati is more real than a Stan Lee story and it makes more sense from a realism POV, but I'm willing to bet that it'll barely be remembered twenty years from now...
|
|
|
Post by dlw66 on Apr 7, 2006 21:28:44 GMT -5
I am having a hard time balancing stories being told in "real time" as opposed to "comic time". Let me explain...
I always thought it was strange when all of a sudden there'd be a Christmas issue. Christmas for what year? As soon as you do that, you've created a problem: if it's Christmas, and if the previous 3-4 issues represented basically a week in the life of the protagonist, and the 3-4 issues prior to that the same thing, then what the heck was everyone doing the rest of the year?? Don't get me wrong -- I know there are holidays, etc. in comic book time. I just think it opens some cans of worms.
I thought the references to Communists and Vietnam in the 60's were fine because they didn't really refer to specific events, but more of an umbrella-type issue.
I did not like when Earth's Mightiest Heroes was "updated" for the present.
The Serpent Crown arc's (Avengers 141-144, 147-149) references to Nelson Rockefeller as president seem very dated, but I just read the tpb a couple of months ago and I thought it was neat, because as a kid I knew he was VP when those books originally came out. I suppose I'm contradicting myself with that example, aren't I? I think the Spidey issue after 9/11 will be important years from now.
But overall, I think comics need to operate in their own time and space. Superman and Batman should always be around 33-35, as should most heroes (Spidey's around 25 now to me...). Time passes, but surely much slower in four-color than in our world.
So, realism -- OK. Real world realism? Mmmmmmm..... no.
|
|
|
Post by thew40 on Apr 7, 2006 23:32:27 GMT -5
One point I really hate though is the concept of writing for "the trade." You're not writing for the trade, you're writing for the reader. I covered that to an extent. Trades are a new hook to bring in new readers, hence why we're seeing more self-contained stories. Personally, I can't stand seeing recaps within the pages of a comic, unless it's giving the reader new information. It's such a waste of space. I say, leave the recap page Marvel has and that's all. Disdain for the old school? I gotta call you on that one. Most creators now credit classic Marvel stories as inspiration. For example, Joss Whedon is a huge fan of the Claremont/Cockrum issues of X-Men. Mark Millar recently said he was reading some of the Bryne Fantastic Four issues and was loving them, as well as Avengers West Coast and Alpha Flight. Even Bendis claims he "Disassmebled" came to him when the Marvel gang was all talking about their fave Avengers stories. Not to mention Frank Miller being a major influence for his Daredevil run. REALLY have to disagree with you there. Cap dealing, having, and ultimately overcoming his doubts and his failings makes him even more special. Granted, this didn't really happen during "Disassembled." He was just kinda like "Holy crap! Stuff is happening! And it's all Wanda's fault! Waahh!" BUT . . . The idea that an iconic hero can have serious problems, have the crap beaten out of him both physically and emotionally, and basically be left in a state where anyone else would have given up, and then have him rise back up, stronger than ever and able to deal with these problems says something about the character. I think it's something that Marvel has always had that DC has been missing (at first, at least) and that's that Marvel has characters that aren't just physically involved in a battle, but also emotionally. We aren't just having a conflict brewing physically and with super-villians, but one that's also within. I think that's really a matter of opinion. I prefer a good dose of reality mixed in with my comics. It makes them more grounded and more relatable to me. I feel like I can get into them and enjoy them more when they're more on a real level. I love the fact that the MU is set mostly in New York as opposed to a fictional city. I enjoyed the fact that the New Avengers were in Cleveland battling the Collective and the SHIELD Helicarrier was above Akron (both being very close to my home town). It's adds accessibilty. I honestly think it's too early to tell. I think it all depends how "Civil War" pans out. I think it's a great idea and I'm hoping that other writers go back and show these secret meetings over the course of Marvel history. ~W~
|
|
|
Post by imperiusrex on Apr 8, 2006 11:39:59 GMT -5
I don't want to go through the trouble of quoting this whole magilla so I'll just go through my points. First writing for the trade isn't just a marketing tool. It's a way of writing each issue as if it's just the chapter of an already collected book. I can't tell you how many times these comics have become so self contained because they're meant to be read as a whole. But that's not how you write a monthly art form. Take a meaghit success like Lost; characters are often recapping vital pieces of information in an interesting way. Nobody says "oh it's a weekly series, but you should wait for the DVD to really watch it." They make every episode an event you don't want to miss. That's what a good storyteller can do. Second the disdain for "old school" isn't that they don't like the stories, they just think it's a passe way of doing comics. Every new group does it. I'm sure the people writing Superman love Mort Weisinger's old stories, but they're not going to change Jimmy Olsen into a giant turtle or Superman into a genie. However it seems some of the new breed of writers have decided the superhero genre shouldn't resemble any of its forebears from just a few years ago. Honestly is there a single bright light in Marvel comics these days? Everything is so dire, conspiracy laden and deathly serious. The bright four color action is gone because it's not realistic enough. Some people like all this heavy histrionics and think it's impressive. I just find it all kind of boring. And heroes can have doubts. And problems. But they all seem to be cookie cutters at Marvel these days. I hope we've all read Astro City where Kurt Busiek manages to take the iconic superhero and add some interesting twists without going too far to the left or right of the concept. The best example is issue 1 vol. 1 where Samaritan manages to be both this iconic character and so human and unique (for those who didn't read it, he's the most powerful person in the world and it isolates him, makes him incredibly busy and the only time he has for himself is in his dreams). it's a perfect example of a story you can only do in comics, whereas I've seen many marvel stories in recent history especially daredevil, where the stories are so realistic that they could be translated to another medium without much tweaking. I just don't think these stories are taking advantage of the real possibilities of comics. I just find all the realism ridiculous. I mean could you really have all the secrecy in the marvel Universe with so many telepaths running around? so many shapeshifters? so many mind controllers? how many times has shield been infiltrated? the helicarrier's been taken over more times than I can count. there are video cameras covering 75% of manhattan; peter parker's secret id would be gone in a matter of weeks. to me getting too realistic is like pulling on threads from a frayed shirt, once you tug at two or three, you end up pulling out a dozen or more. And I don't mean to just single out Civil War. Almost all of Marvel's "events" will fall by the wayside because it usually takes 4-6 years until someone decides to undo whatever the event caused. History is a problem for a lot of writers and readers, so they constantly revamp, often when it's not needed. of course this is all a matter of my opinion, but I can tell you I don't buy much more than a half dozen books a month when maybe five years ago I bought thirty titles a month. I hate giving up on Marvel and DC, but their titles just don't bring me much enjoyment anymore for the reasons I listed.
|
|