Are late 70s and 80s comics better or worse than comics of the 00s??

[echostation]

I haven't read a single issue of any new comic recently since I'd say about 2002, really it's been that long, the only thing I ever do sometimes to catch up in general is to read some of the spoiler summaries that are so well given here on these forums... I used to read much older comics

I was wondering for all of you out there who are big marvel fans, do you think comics of the mid 70s and the 80s are much better or much worse than comics of say the past 4-5 years? The only ones I ever read were from way back when and I thoroughly enjoyed them but I don't know how good or bad current comics are.

I'm purposely leaving the 90s out of this cuz i feel that's a separate topic...

[U.S War Machine]

The old classic comics to me are better than the modern

[Anubis]

I find most of the stuff from the 60's on through to the 70's unreadable. Lord knows i've tried. It's just from a different time. The 80's is really when things started to mature more. Guys like Grant Morrison, Frank Miller, and Alan Moore started to pop up and really revolutionize the industry. Are comics better now than they were in the 70's and 80's? I don't know. The decade isn't over. Though there have been some truely great work produced. I'd have to say it's much more sophisticated.

And the 90's wasn't all that bad either. The 90's produced some incredible stuff. James Robinson's Starman. Neil Gaimen's Sandman. The Thunderbolts, Planetary, Golden Age, etc, etc.

[Phaedrus45]

What I love about the comics from the 70's and 80's is the paper quality. For me, it just looks better. Everything now is so damn glossy. Plus, when you have comics on disk, the older ones don't look as cheesy.

Now, for content, it really depends on preference, I guess. But, take comics, like She-Hulk. The first series is really hard to read, and a person can easily make an argument that Slott's She-Hulk is much, much better reading material. (BTW, just out this week, Essential She-Hulk Vol. 1!)

In fact, some of the comics I loved as a kid just don't hold up anymore. They are either corny or simply a 2 dimensional story without anything special to make it worthy of remembering.

[Artistsean]

It depends, sometimes the stories are real good and powerful. Real meaningful, but then again sometimes you get the Rocket Racer and that Disco villian, or a comic about Peter playing a game o football with the life of the Watcher in the balance.

To me it depends on how the company is running the comics. They have written the basic plot and had the artists decide most of it, then they did it were the art was way more important and you would get splash page after splash page and all action and the story came second (happened alot during the 90s) recently I think they have made writing more important than the art (not a bad way to go, but the art is important too)

[XBRoughneck]

Haven't followed comics to closely recently, but the 80s artist were pretty sharp.

Frizetta, John Byrne, George Perez, Frank Miller....

Very good era IMO for comic art.

[XBRoughneck]

Haven't followed comics to closely recently, but the 80s artist were pretty sharp.

Frizetta, John Byrne, George Perez, Frank Miller....

Very good era IMO for comic art.

[Silicon Surfer]

As others have said it is a matter of personal preference. For me the 60's 70's and early 80's were far better than the comics of today. Yes the science was frequently bad but people then weren't as scientifically sophisticated as they are in today's internet age. the storytelling ability was on the average far better than it is today. There were consistency problems due to deadlines and the inability to confer with anyone fast enough but still many things stayed the same about a character no matter how many times the writers changed. Too many writers today feel that they can do whatever they feel like without regard to the fact that they are writing in a shared universe with a continuity than came before them and that another writer will have to deal with after they are gone. As a result characters do the sorts of inconsistant things that we consistantly argue about here.

[gildea]

To be honest i would guess in twenty years time people will probably look at the science in our comics and have a good giggle.

[Wilderbeast]

golden age stuff was boring and dated. today's stuff is waaaay highr quality and better carachters.

[Themanofbat]

golden age stuff was boring and dated. today's stuff is waaaay highr quality and better carachters.

Maybe it's boring because YOU'RE boring. :)

;)

[WOLVERINE25TH]

I loved comics from mid 70s-mid 90s. Late 90s they became hit or miss, and today Marvel's B-stuff is much better than it's A stuff.

[Elijya]

I find most of the stuff from the 60's on through to the 70's unreadable. Lord knows i've tried. It's just from a different time. The 80's is really when things started to mature more. Guys like Grant Morrison, Frank Miller, and Alan Moore started to pop up and really revolutionize the industry. Are comics better now than they were in the 70's and 80's? I don't know. The decade isn't over. Though there have been some truely great work produced. I'd have to say it's much more sophisticated.

And the 90's wasn't all that bad either. The 90's produced some incredible stuff. James Robinson's Starman. Neil Gaimen's Sandman. The Thunderbolts, Planetary, Golden Age, etc, etc.
^ ditto :up:

I appreciate the old stuff, sure, but there's very little of it I can actually read. Today's comics are 100% enjoyment for me, though. The execution is just 1,000 times better and more exciting.

[TheCorpulent1]

Older stuff tends to be very campy, from what I've seen. It's hard for me to read. I've tried numerous times to read the old Journey Into Mystery stuff for fanboyism's sake, but I can only get through about 3 or 4 issues at a time. Modern stuff I can read for hours and hours nonstop.

[Kool-Aid]

There's some stuff that's good that was done in the 70s and 80s, but I like more of whats done now.

[vindrow]

The comics of the 70's and 80's to me are much better than what we have now.

[Super Mark]

I can't say the classics are better. But I can say that I like them better!
The comics of the 80s contained lots of action. Much of the new stuff I see contains lots of violence.

To me, there is a difference between action and violence.
Pulp Fiction contained violence. Star Wars contained action.

Not saying one is better, just what I prefer for fun.

[Fred_Fury]

The writing was better in the 80's, but the art is so much better now.

[Fading]

I can't speak on the 70's, was born in 83 and closest comic shop is 30 miles away. I read and collected some while growing up but they were the current late 80's and 90's comics, tho I have read up and know the backstories now :).

Anyway I'm biased personally, I think the 80's-90's had the right formula, but worse art work. The hero's sometimes were a bit over the top and cliche in the 80's IMO, but the overall stories were great and more origional. I have tons of comics and can pick up almost any of them from the 80-90's and it be a great read, same with some of the older ones I got a few years ago. Few of the ones to have come out in the past 6 years have really caught my attention enough to care. I like the Ultimate Hulk vs. Wolverine, the new Civil War line's potential, tho we'll have ot see if CW is worth it. Most of it just feel like rehashing of old stories. Not to count I've noticed the movies have influenced the comics in a bad way, like they were embarrased of their comic book counterparts so they changed things like costumes to fit the movies (especially in X-men atleast for awhile with the black leather uniforms).

[XFanTim]

golden age stuff was boring and dated. today's stuff is waaaay highr quality and better carachters.
You do know that "Golden Age" refers to the 40's, not the 70's, right?

[Cyclops]

They cared more about the product in the 60s and 70s, and perhaps even into the 80s. Can you honestly say that about so many books these days? Millar just uses his comicbooks to write big action sequences and push his political views on people. Bendis just writes to boost his ego. JMS writes to leave his mark on characters, not to add to their legacies. And the editors and other higher-ups care more about lining their pockets than producing quality work.

What made Marvel truly special in the first place was that Stan, Jack, Steve and company made comics with a very personal flair to them. They cared not only about making money but about giving the readers a truly satisfying experience. And I cannot say that about the comics of today.

[Anubis]

Well, Marvel comics maybe.

[Cyclops]

And this is the Marvel Comics forum, hence the question applies to Marvel Comics.

[Anubis]

The question says comcis, not Marvel comics. You'd be within your right to bring up indy stuff, or Darkhorse.

[Cyclops]

So then it should be in the Misc. Comics Forum, not the Marvel Comics forum. If it's in the Marvel Comics Forum, it's safe to assume that it's asking about Marvel Comics. It doesn't need to be explicitly stated in the title since it's under the Marvel Comics banner.

[Super Mark]

The writing was better in the 80's, but the art is so much better now.

Though there are definitely expceptions, you may, in general, be right!
Mark

[Anubis]

I'm not gonna sit here and try and guess what the guy was thinking. As a whole, DC, Marvel, Indy publishing, Image, etc, is far better. If were just talking Marvel then, no. No it's not. Not better than the 80's at least.

[Speedball]

I don't they are worse or better, just WAY cheesier.

[Kevin]

the first thing i would say is DIFFERENT, comics now and then are DIFFERENT. the second is that for me, the 60's suck. it's just so hard to read that stuff without wanting to stab yourself in the eyes... moving on, a comic like the Amazing Spider-man was best in the mid 70's-all 80's. even some of the 90's stuff was cool... up until, like, i think '94. the clone saga then final chapter kinda killed it completely and he's still not the same today. anyway, comics today are cool depending on what the comic is

[echostation]

I wrote in the question text in the second paragraph, "so for all of you out there who are big marvel fans"

I thought it was pretty much obvious from that

Guess I should be even more obvious and even more obviously written MARVEL in the subject matter despite mentioning it in the text itself and putting it in the Marvel forum

I would've put it in Misc comics otherwise

[Sparta*]

The old classic comics to me are better than the modern

Agreed :up:

[iloveclones]

I love the comics I grew up with, in the 70s and 80s, and if you really pushed me, that's what I would pick. I would choose Byrne/Claremont X-Men, Miller DD, early Perez Avengers, Byrne's FF and Spidey from around 120-200 over any of their later incarnations. The stories were more connected, the continuity tighter. The Night Gwen Stacy Died, Dark Phoenix Saga, God Loves Man Kills, Elektra, Korvac Saga, Days of Future Past. All mammoth stories that came out of that era.

BUT, that being said, I love what's coming out now. And I agree with Elijya that people approach it with a better appreciation/knowledge/application of the craft. And in my opinion, Marvel hasn't been this good since the 80s. And I think the comics industry as a whole, creatively if not financially, may be the healthiest it's ever been.

My own personal theory is that the era that you began reading will always be your favorite. It's what hooked you, and you have an emotional attachment. I've dutifully read all the early 60s Marvels, and some of them are a real chore. So I can understand younger guys feeling the same way about the 70s or 80s.

So to sum up: it's all good.

[UK_Stu]

Maybe I remember them through rose-tinted spectacles, but for me the 70s and 80s comics were better then what we have now. I started reading comics in the late 70s and always look back with fond memories.

Whenever I dig back issues out or read a TPB, I'll admit the artwork isn't as good as I remember it, but what I do notice is the attention to detail. Comics in the 70s and 80s had sub plots, little things which ran in the background for months until they appeared as the main storyline. Writers seemed to care about continuity a little more and weren't forced to write stories designed to be TPB length. And footnotes, and speech bubbles...

[echostation]

can someone please recommend what would be good reading for now a days comcis... I really don't have all that much money so would mainly like to stick to one or two series tops instead of buying a whole bunch that people here seem to do, i can't afford that, but I am interested in getting back into comics, just don't know what would be the best one to get into, any recommendations? Specifically MARVEL... I don't read DC.

Like I loved stuff like the FIRST Marvel Secret wars, not the second, but a lot of the stuff that dealt with X-men and Avengers against galactic conflicts... esp the X-men and the Shiaar and obv the whole Phoenix saga

are there any recommendations of solid comics out there that are of this sorta quality, as in lots of cool good adventure with well thought out storylines.. what i can't stand is constant talkie talkie crap or just ultra violence for the sake of gratuitous stupid violence

[Deathlok2001]

The old classic comics to me are better than the modern

The 1970s Marvel & DC era was the best ever! Dc had all those earths, which was really an early verison of Marvels Ultimate line.

[The Batman]

marvel comics were a hell of alot better in the 70's and 80's.

[Elijya]

can someone please recommend what would be good reading for now a days comcis... I really don't have all that much money so would mainly like to stick to one or two series tops instead of buying a whole bunch that people here seem to do, i can't afford that, but I am interested in getting back into comics, just don't know what would be the best one to get into, any recommendations? Specifically MARVEL... I don't read DC.

Like I loved stuff like the FIRST Marvel Secret wars, not the second, but a lot of the stuff that dealt with X-men and Avengers against galactic conflicts... esp the X-men and the Shiaar and obv the whole Phoenix saga

are there any recommendations of solid comics out there that are of this sorta quality, as in lots of cool good adventure with well thought out storylines.. what i can't stand is constant talkie talkie crap or just ultra violence for the sake of gratuitous stupid violence
sure, here, lemme give you a couple of suggestions and you pick what sounds good to you:

She-Hulk - funny, and the best use of Continuity on the stands today. Plus, you'll actually feel that you bought $2.99 worth of comic. Dan Slott is Marvel's best writer right now, because he actually remembers everything that's come before (hehe, here, read this strip about him http://yearone.spiderspawn.com/index.php?comic_id=305 ). She-Hulk is a lawyer and she's now working for a law firm that deals with superhuman cases. So there's stuff like a ghost appearing at his own murder trial, the Constrictor suing Hercules for assault, fun stuff like that :D
two pages from the series:
http://milehighcomics.com/cgi-bin/backissue.cgi?action=page1&issue=73746978705%204
http://milehighcomics.com/cgi-bin/backissue.cgi?action=page2&issue=73746978705%204

Runaways & Young Avengers - both extremely fun titles. These books are what the New Warriors were in the early 90s, or what the X-Men were in the early 80s. They'rehaving a 4-issue team-up miniseries that starts this month that would be a good place for you to check both teams out.
cover galleries for both titles:
http://milehighcomics.com/cgi-bin/backissue.cgi?action=list&title=70391594988&snumber=1
http://milehighcomics.com/cgi-bin/backissue.cgi?action=list&title=99410907980&snumber=1


Civil War - Gorgeous art, intriguing plot, great action. Only 2 issues in and lasts for 7, so easy to jump onto. It's the most important thing going on in the MU right now, so if you want to catch up, this is the place to be.
cover gallery:
http://milehighcomics.com/cgi-bin/backissue.cgi?action=list&title=17110090947&snumber=1

Marvel Team-Up - just like the classic title, it's just about having tons of fun with lots of different characters and watching them bounce off each other. Good amounts of action, too. An example of a recent arc entitled "League of Losers": A villain from the future comes back to conquer the present and with advanced knowledge wipes out most of the major heroes. But he doesn't have files on any of the d-list characters and assumes they'll be no threat. So it's up to guys like Speedball, Darkhawk, and Terror Inc. to set things right.
Cover gallery (and also you can read the first three pages of most issues):
http://milehighcomics.com/cgi-bin/backissue.cgi?action=list&title=52021726214&snumber=1

[WOLVERINE25TH]

If she gets relaunched, may wanna check out Spider-Girl. Current run's about to end with #100 but there's been talk of a vol. 2. It's the best Spidey you'll get these days.

[Anubis]

Oh and don't forget that Spidey/Human Torch mini Dan Slott did. That's classic Spidey goodness.

[Themanofbat]

^ ditto :up:

I appreciate the old stuff, sure, but there's very little of it I can actually read. Today's comics are 100% enjoyment for me, though. The execution is just 1,000 times better and more exciting.

It's absolutely mind-boggling to me how you can't read stuff like the original Byrne/Claremont X-Men run, or ASM from issues 120 to 250 (with few exceptions), or Byrne's FF run, or Miller's DareDevil, or Wolfman/Perez's Teen Titans, etc...

And how you find the nice & tidy begining/middle/end format of today's 6 issue arc 1000 times better executed than an on-going soap opera that was the comic storytelling style of the 70's is beyond me.

And even though today's artists mat be better as far as ability to draw, I find they lack in the ability to tell a story with their art... something that yesteryear's artists were a lot better at.

And maybe it's just my jaded self speaking here, but with very few exceptions, today's creators appear to not care about their craft like they did in the 70's. Very few creators today properly research their stories... Busiek & Slott are two that come to mind that actually do their jobs properly.

:(

[TheCorpulent1]

I thought we were talking about the really old stuff. Miller's DD was good, I enjoyed the Dark Phoenix Saga when I read it a couple of years ago a lot, and I loved the older Spidey stuff. It's only when I go way back to the early '60s that things start to get wonky, with the chapters within a single issue and the goofy, self-contained stories with one-off villains.

[Zeu]

Talk Civil War to me, I´m completelly oblivious to it.

Ironman wants Superhero registration, Cap doesn´t.

Other than that, imagine that I don´t regularly buy neither Ironman or Cap and don´t plan to.

Would I miss HUGE lumps of plot like I did with Infinite Criss by sticking to the main title?

[Anubis]

....What did you do? Just pick a random thread to ask this question in?

[Genesis 1.0]

^ ditto :up:

I appreciate the old stuff, sure, but there's very little of it I can actually read. Today's comics are 100% enjoyment for me, though. The execution is just 1,000 times better and more exciting.

Same sentiment here. I value the 70's - 80's work as classics, they laid the groundwork for what we have today. It was the passion and pride they placed in this work that ensured that we still have these titles to read today. That being said, simply being first or being older, doesn't automatically make things 'better' than what comes after. Perfect example, I love the NBA's Dr. J era and I know that's what people are held up to, but does that mean I think J could demolish the guys in the leauge today? No.

You can't discard the past as dated and you can't write the stuff today as souless. The Stan Lee's of that era didn't write these characters to stay at Square 1, they wrote them so they could progress and evolve. It's what they're supposed to do, relate to the people of today while still being able to appeal to your more 'old school' people and the readers of tommorow that'll class today's work as 'old school' to what they have then. To me, 'better' is too relative when you're weighing something on this scale. I prefer to think of the 70's & 80's material as Legendary and today's stuff as Legends in the making. Still some kinks to work out and some screws missing, but by no means was everything from 1970 - 1980 perfect.

On a whole, I don't see 'better' so much as I see 'different'. Comics have changed as much as the people writing them. Change by nature is viewed as 'better' or 'worse' which is relative. Personally, I'd prefer today's Captain America to his older stuff. I'd take Bryne's X-Men to 2004-2005's. The themes and storylines of those days seem more 'campy' as someone said, because that's what those times were, that was the pitch. I think there's a nice balance at the moment, and more importantly, I still enjoy reading my comics. When I stop enjoying what's published, then I stop reading, then somebody's gone a f*&^%#$ up.:up:

[Silicon Surfer]

We don't really know whether todays artists are any better than those of the 60's and 70's. In those days artists were constrained by the printing tech of the time. Artists had to draw the stories in a manner that the printing tech could reproduce.

[Jlandsw]

I haven't read a single issue of any new comic recently since I'd say about 2002, really it's been that long, the only thing I ever do sometimes to catch up in general is to read some of the spoiler summaries that are so well given here on these forums... I used to read much older comics

I was wondering for all of you out there who are big marvel fans, do you think comics of the mid 70s and the 80s are much better or much worse than comics of say the past 4-5 years? The only ones I ever read were from way back when and I thoroughly enjoyed them but I don't know how good or bad current comics are.

I'm purposely leaving the 90s out of this cuz i feel that's a separate topic...

IMO it depends, the artwork is better now. But the stories were better then. I love old school Spider-man and X-Men. But I do like the recent Emma Frost comics!!

[roach]

I think with old school comics like X-men or Spider-man they were pretty much to an extent allowed to do whatever they want on the books. No one was dictating(from what I know) what to do on the books.

[Silver Sable]

I believe comics from the 70's- mid 90's were better

[spiderwasp]

There are exceptions of course (Such as Young Avengers and She-Hulk) but I definately prefer the earlier years. I think things got out of control in the 90s. The universe was much smaller in the 60s and 70s and developments meant something. In the 90s, popular characters starting appearing in multiple books every month and popular teams starting splitting into branches. So many new characters have been introduced that it has become too much and so many "events" have happened that most of them don't seem very important any more. The challenge now isn't just to tell a good story and develop characters, it is to do something that will shock everybody. I think if Marvel had kept one Spider-man book, one or two books about mutants and so forth, we would all still be much more enthralled with them. On the other hand, I was one of those people who was devouring most of what Marvel was putting out in the early 90s so I guess I must share the blame.

[Ben Urich]

The old stuff is great for what it is: harmless fun. It was a lot more carefree back then. Reading the Superman in the Fifties trade is such a trip because the stories are so awful that they're just laugh-out-loud fun. And I like that.
I think comparing the 50s and 60s books to today's books is like comparing apples to baby wolverines. Doesn't make sense.
The 80s stuff I've read is a lot better than what comes out today: Watchmen, DKR, etc.
The 90s get a bad rap because of all the gimmicky marketing bull**** that damn near ruined the industry, but we can't forget that the 90s saw the Sandman, Transmetropolitan, etc. More hit than miss for me.
The 00s aren't over yet, but they've been... interesting. Both companies have shown flashes of brilliance (DC's Crises, Marvel's 1602) and idiocy (DC cancelling Gotham Central, Marvel's Trouble and Spider-Man's unmasking). It'll be interesting to see how the decade ends.

TMOB, I find Claremont's X-Men to be unreadable. No one thinks in complete paragraphs like that. The stories themselves are okay, but the dialogues/monologues... ick :(

[ang_hulk]

worse,they acted out the fact that they were for younglings and that it wasnt a respected genre.Now once the 80s rolled around things got a bit better but still,todays stuff is tops.

[Cyclops]

Yeah. Claremont has always written comics as if he were a "frustrated novelist" (the best description of his style I've ever seen) and it really gets hard to read sometimes. I have one issue of his run on Iron Fist with Byrne, and it is really really hard to read on account of both excessive and terrible dialogue.

[Elijya]

It's absolutely mind-boggling to me how you can't read stuff like the original Byrne/Claremont X-Men run, or ASM from issues 120 to 250 (with few exceptions), or Byrne's FF run, or Miller's DareDevil, or Wolfman/Perez's Teen Titans, etc...

And how you find the nice & tidy begining/middle/end format of today's 6 issue arc 1000 times better executed than an on-going soap opera that was the comic storytelling style of the 70's is beyond me.

And even though today's artists mat be better as far as ability to draw, I find they lack in the ability to tell a story with their art... something that yesteryear's artists were a lot better at.

And maybe it's just my jaded self speaking here, but with very few exceptions, today's creators appear to not care about their craft like they did in the 70's. Very few creators today properly research their stories... Busiek & Slott are two that come to mind that actually do their jobs properly.

:(

You may be thinking of the wrong titles. When I talk about the books I enjoy now adays, I'm talking about Preacher, Ex Machina, Conan, 100 Bullets, Fear Agent, Invincible, Walking Dead, Noble Causes, Runaways, Fables, She-Hulk, Marvel Team-Up, Y-The Last Man, anything by Phil Hester or Warren Ellis, these're the books I'm thinking of when I can say without a doubt in my mind I'd prefer them ten times out of ten to things from 20-30 years ago, and they all meet your criteria of well crafted ongoing stories capable of subtlety and sub plots, and none are restricted to padded six issue arcs. Hell, Noble Causes IS a Soap Opera more quintessentially so than anything Claremont ever achieved even.

And hey, the runs you pointed out ARE some of the books I enjoyed from that Era. Frank's DD was great stuff, probably the best thing coming out of the time, outside of Roy Thomas' Conan. Those are two titles I do hold in equal regard to my favorite books of today.

[Elijya]

Talk Civil War to me, I´m completelly oblivious to it.

Ironman wants Superhero registration, Cap doesn´t.

Other than that, imagine that I don´t regularly buy neither Ironman or Cap and don´t plan to.

Would I miss HUGE lumps of plot like I did with Infinite Criss by sticking to the main title?
absolutely not, it's nowhere near as complex as IC, which was all over the place, covering just about everybody and everything in the DC universe. Civil War is much more down to earth, and you should more or less be able to jump right in. As of right now there are only three issues I would recommend to get you started: Civil War #1 and 2, and New Avengers: The Illuminati, which is the prologue to Civil War.

[Elijya]

The old stuff is great for what it is: harmless fun. It was a lot more carefree back then. Reading the Superman in the Fifties trade is such a trip because the stories are so awful that they're just laugh-out-loud fun. And I like that.
I think comparing the 50s and 60s books to today's books is like comparing apples to baby wolverines. Doesn't make sense.
The 80s stuff I've read is a lot better than what comes out today: Watchmen, DKR, etc.
The 90s get a bad rap because of all the gimmicky marketing bull**** that damn near ruined the industry, but we can't forget that the 90s saw the Sandman, Transmetropolitan, etc. More hit than miss for me.
The 00s aren't over yet, but they've been... interesting. Both companies have shown flashes of brilliance (DC's Crises, Marvel's 1602) and idiocy (DC cancelling Gotham Central, Marvel's Trouble and Spider-Man's unmasking). It'll be interesting to see how the decade ends.

TMOB, I find Claremont's X-Men to be unreadable. No one thinks in complete paragraphs like that. The stories themselves are okay, but the dialogues/monologues... ick :(

I think when we talk about the 80s, we're talking about the era in general. Watchmen, DKR, MAUS, V - those were the exceptions, the diamonds in the rough, and not in the least representative of what the rest of the industry was doing at the time at all.

It's always been my impression that when people talk about "the 90s" in comics, they're really more refering to about 89-96 or so. That was the gimmicky era, that was where the industry took a thousands ups and downs. The era that followed it was one of recovery and was so completely different I would never group them together. Transmet didn't start til late '97, Preacher didn't start til 95 - these books started at the end of the bad times, and wouldn't attain true notoriety until it was most certainly over and people truly began to seek quality over gimmicks. Likewise, Gaiman's Sandman started in 88, but it was a small-selling title for much of the time. You know how some comic stores may have dozens of copies of any given comic from between 1985 and 1995, because people bought multiple copies for "investment", artificially inflating those books' sales numbers to the 100s of thousands and flooding the market with those books rendering them basicly worthless? Not so with Sandman, that was a title people at the time glossed over, which makes a run of the series quite rare and one of the few titles of that time to be actually worth money. So again, I don't think it's a title that was reflective of the era it was published in.

[CaptainStacy]

I love the comics I grew up with, in the 70s and 80s, and if you really pushed me, that's what I would pick. I would choose Byrne/Claremont X-Men, Miller DD, early Perez Avengers, Byrne's FF and Spidey from around 120-200 over any of their later incarnations. The stories were more connected, the continuity tighter. The Night Gwen Stacy Died, Dark Phoenix Saga, God Loves Man Kills, Elektra, Korvac Saga, Days of Future Past. All mammoth stories that came out of that era.

BUT, that being said, I love what's coming out now. And I agree with Elijya that people approach it with a better appreciation/knowledge/application of the craft. And in my opinion, Marvel hasn't been this good since the 80s. And I think the comics industry as a whole, creatively if not financially, may be the healthiest it's ever been.

My own personal theory is that the era that you began reading will always be your favorite. It's what hooked you, and you have an emotional attachment. I've dutifully read all the early 60s Marvels, and some of them are a real chore. So I can understand younger guys feeling the same way about the 70s or 80s.

So to sum up: it's all good.

I think this pretty much sums up my feelings as well.

[32CAGE]

I love the comics I grew up with, in the 70s and 80s, and if you really pushed me, that's what I would pick. I would choose Byrne/Claremont X-Men, Miller DD, early Perez Avengers, Byrne's FF and Spidey from around 120-200 over any of their later incarnations. The stories were more connected, the continuity tighter. The Night Gwen Stacy Died, Dark Phoenix Saga, God Loves Man Kills, Elektra, Korvac Saga, Days of Future Past. All mammoth stories that came out of that era.

BUT, that being said, I love what's coming out now. And I agree with Elijya that people approach it with a better appreciation/knowledge/application of the craft. And in my opinion, Marvel hasn't been this good since the 80s. And I think the comics industry as a whole, creatively if not financially, may be the healthiest it's ever been.

My own personal theory is that the era that you began reading will always be your favorite. It's what hooked you, and you have an emotional attachment. I've dutifully read all the early 60s Marvels, and some of them are a real chore. So I can understand younger guys feeling the same way about the 70s or 80s.

So to sum up: it's all good.


I agree with your assessment. I am more moved by the comics if first grew up with in the 70's and 80's.

[herakles]

I agree that during the 90s sucked with all the varient, gold, chorminum covers. That was the main reason why I stopped reading for 8 years. With that said I think the 70s-80s where better as far as story but the technology was BAD in comparation to today! Today's storylines have promise like Young Avengers, Civil War, Black Panther, Winter Soldier arch from Cap AM, Ares mini, and the Ultimate line along with Sentry (even though I hate both!). I have fun reading my Tales to Astonish and JIM comics from time to time. I quess what I'm trying to say is that I'm 33 and I started reading when I was 9 in 1982 so of course I'd feel more attach to the era of the 80's than today.

[Zeu]

absolutely not, it's nowhere near as complex as IC, which was all over the place, covering just about everybody and everything in the DC universe. Civil War is much more down to earth, and you should more or less be able to jump right in. As of right now there are only three issues I would recommend to get you started: Civil War #1 and 2, and New Avengers: The Illuminati, which is the prologue to Civil War.

thanks, Elijya, I have to confess I am really tempted to start buying it.

[Elijya]

hey, like I said, all you need to do is pick up three issues that are already out, and then five more month to month as it's a sevn issue miniseries. That's it, nothing else needed, and it's pretty important to the Marvel Universe in general, so it's definitely something you should check out

[Zeu]

Coolness, already added it to my standing orders.

Now, time to scout eBay for back issues. :)

[GNR]

I just started reading monthlies last summer and from what I've read from that era,it's very hard to enjoy.

Unrealistic and over-the-top dialogue and paragraphs of thought balloons assuming the reader is a complete idiot.

.02 from a new schooler.

[Elijya]

yeah, the endless amounts of exposition irritate me

[Themanofbat]

But that over-the-top dialogue was mostly in comics from the 60's...

The 70's books had a lot less of that, in my opinion.

[Elijya]

yeah, there's been a steady progression of less and less through the years

[Themanofbat]

I remember a 2 issue story from around 1966 where Spidey battles the Lizard with his arm in a sling in a train yard, and both characters are struggling to fit with the confines of the word balloons...

:(

[MyPokerShirt]

I haven't read a single issue of any new comic recently since I'd say about 2002

You should read some independent stuff. Go take a look at Icon, Vertigo and Image, Top Cow, Boom!Studios etc.

There are some great comics out there.
Walking Dead
Powers
Invincible
Thats horror/drama, Detective book, Hero Book.
Good stuff. Seriously, take a look around. Y the last man, 100 bullets, the talent, runaways. If not, just buy some tpbs. i gave up in about 2002 and now im back. The industry's not in too bad a shape atm. Old stuff is classic but you just cannot relate and today's art, with its realism, is well worth it. :up:

[MyPokerShirt]

absolutely not, it's nowhere near as complex as IC, which was all over the place, covering just about everybody and everything in the DC universe. Civil War is much more down to earth, and you should more or less be able to jump right in. As of right now there are only three issues I would recommend to get you started: Civil War #1 and 2, and New Avengers: The Illuminati, which is the prologue to Civil War.

:up:
well said. most details are in the accompanying books but civil war itself is 7issues of twists, fast action and ground-breaking TRULY marvel-changing stuff. At least thats whats happened so far and thats whats been promised...

[SLVRSR4]

I like some of the random 80's stuff like new mutants and found that Green lantern green arrow was some what edgy for it's time, but the cap is just plain:down I think cap is a great idea but the stuff he was fighting buck toothed japanese embarassing

[Sin Eater]

There isn't another period with as many definitive runs as the 70's and especially the 80's. Claremont and Byrne doing X-Men, David Michelinie and Bob Layton on Iron-Man, Walt on Thor, Byrne on Fantastic Four and Alpha Flight, Stern and Romita Jr. on Spider, Michelinie and McFarlane on Spidey, Miller and Daredevil and Dark Knight, The Watchmen, Peter David on Hulk, Roy Thomas and John Buscema on Conan, etc...

The stories were far more involved and gripping. Guys like Bendis are noticeably weaker writers than a number of writers from that era.

The art production today is superior, though. Not the artists, but the production. Dr. Martin's water colored dyes just can't compete with the coloring process today, but those old newsprint comics do have their charm.

[Cosmic Crackle!]

I think you'll always have a preference for the comics you grew up with which, in my case, was the 70s and early 80s. Yes, they might seem simpler and a bit campy in places but they were comics for kids and I was a kid. It seems superhero comics have backed themselves into a corner. They're trying to tell, basically, ridiculous stories about daft characters with silly powers to an audience that's grown up instead of always getting the new generation on board and letting older readers move onto more mature material (if they want to - I never did)

As far as art goes, I see fantastically rendered covers nowadays but, on the whole, woefully lacking interiors and writing that always claims to harken back to a classic time but never does. Every year also brings a new 'lets throw everything out and start again' series that just confuses everything.

So yes, for me, it'll always be a stackload of Essentials rather than what's new on the bookshelf (as far as Marvel goes, anyway).

[Ben Urich]

The only non-Watchmen superhero comic from the 80s worth reading is Miller's Daredevil. :o Everything else is just unreadable. :(

[Zeu]

The only non-Watchmen superhero comic from the 80s worth reading is Miller's Daredevil. :o Everything else is just unreadable. :(

Of course that is your own taste peaking.
Anyone is entitled to their tastes.
I for one have TONS of titles I absolutelly loved.

Marv Wolfman&George Perez´Teen Titans

Chris Clairmont&John Byrne&Terry Austin´s X.-Men

Doug Moench and Bill Sienkiewicz on Moonknight

One of my very first superheroine crushes was Dazzler, drawn by Frank Springer

John Byrne on Captain Amercia

John Romita Jr on Spider-man

Moore and Bissette on Swamp Thing

John Romita Jr. and David Michelinie in Ironman

John Buscema on Fantastic Four

John Buscema on Conan

Barry Windsor Smith in Conan

Perez in Black Widow

Byrne in Fantastic Four

Byrne in Superman

Perez in Wonder Woman

Bart Sears in Justice League of Europe

Adam Hughes in Justice League

John Buscema in Avengers

George Tuska on Luke Cage (Luke faces Dr. Doom, how cool was thath?)

Marshal Rogers in Batman

Bil Sienkiewicz in New Mutants (I still have Damielle´s huge mystical bear imprinted in my retina)

Marshal Rogers in Doc Strange

Billy Graham and his unbelievable Black Panther

Steve Englehart and Frank Brunner on Doc Strange (Lea was simply delicious!)


and on and on and on

[Elijya]

The only non-Watchmen superhero comic from the 80s worth reading is Miller's Daredevil. :o Everything else is just unreadable. :(
(psst, what about Miracle Man?)

[rigel7soldiers]

Captain America in the 80's was one of my favorite comics ever. Scourge of the Underworld, Serpent Society, John Walker killing a guy with a trident... it was all great.

However, the late seventies was bad, bad, bad. the year was 1977; the year of the Fever. That same fever that would go on to cause "Spider-Man vs. the Hypno-Hustler!"

also, for the record, I didn't care for Byrne on Superman. Wasn't he already doing everything for Marvel? I love Alpha Flight and all, but damn did he get around back then.

[Prognosticator]

I haven't read a single issue of any new comic recently since I'd say about 2002, really it's been that long, the only thing I ever do sometimes to catch up in general is to read some of the spoiler summaries that are so well given here on these forums... I used to read much older comics

I was wondering for all of you out there who are big marvel fans, do you think comics of the mid 70s and the 80s are much better or much worse than comics of say the past 4-5 years? The only ones I ever read were from way back when and I thoroughly enjoyed them but I don't know how good or bad current comics are.

I'm purposely leaving the 90s out of this cuz i feel that's a separate topic...

I'll give props that i can't even give away to the classic stories of the late 70s and 80s, but the artwork today ALONE puts today's work light years ahead of anything that has EVER come out, EVER! You seriously cannot beat today's artists and the passion they pour into comics! That, mixed with updated printing technology, and you've got something that "should" only get better with time:up:

[rigel7soldiers]

I think Jack Kirby is the best comic artist ever, actually. Oh, right, sorry, Jacob Kutzberg. I'm just saying, nobody calls Ryan Sook "The King."

And nobody beats Walt Simonson in an art-off. You know why? Not only was he a fantastic artist, but his signature looks like a dinosaur.

[Themanofbat]

You seriously cannot beat today's artists and the passion they pour into comics!

It is my opinion that while many of today's artists are splashy and make great poster art panels, they unfortunately lack the ability to tell a story with their artwork... unlike comic book artists of the 70's.

So while it may look "pretty", sometimes it's difficult to follow.

And I doubt that yesyeryear's artists lacked "passion". :mad:

:)

[Ben Urich]

(psst, what about Miracle Man?)

Never read it.

[Elijya]

:eek:

[The Cleric]

back in the day, the books made sense and weren't spoiled by Joe q. the art, while not as flashy as today, did look great for the time while giving more space for dialogue and story-telling. (thats all i ask for in a comic) these days, it could take 7 minutes to read a book. for three bucks, at least let it be 8 minutes long. also, with books like waldy the wanderer, who can go against the 80's?
Another thing worth mentioning is that these days, it is hard to have books like thor, or silver surfer. boneheads these days simply dont appreciate the good old times.

[boywonder13]

COmics from the 60s, 70s,80s and some of the good stuff from the 90s is better than the comics today.

I was born in the 90s and I notice how much better they are than today's comics. Its a sad, sad world.

:(

[Prognosticator]

COmics from the 60s, 70s,80s and some of the good stuff from the 90s is better than the comics today.

I was born in the 90s and I notice how much better they are than today's comics. Its a sad, sad world.

:(

...is they really?!?

[Prognosticator]

But seriously, I agree... that's why there are literally thousands and THOUSANDS of indie comics coming out with so many original ideas. I mean, how stupid!

I hate it that so many books are getting released with original concepts; such as "Y: The Last Man", or "Peanut Butter & Jeremy", or "The Goon"...it pisses me off so bad. I wish Jack Kirby and Stan Lee were still the only people doing anything that gets attention!

It sucks that labels such as Dark Horse and Black Bull among others have the opportunity to put out new and different stuff for people to read! I wish the only book they published was "Aliens Vs. Predator" like back in the good ole' 90s!

[Themanofbat]

(psst, what about MiracleMan?)

Yep... MarvelMan kicks major arse... far superior stuff than Miller's DareDevil as far as I'm concerned.

Issue #2 was one of the most gruesome super-hero battles ever put to print.

[Themanofbat]

Bill Willingham's Elementals was another fantastic super-hero book that just grabbed people by the balls... and his art was simply gorgeous. :up: as was his writing. :cool:

Yes... I believe it's the same Bill Willingham that writes Fables.

:)

[Prognosticator]

back in the day, the books made sense and weren't spoiled by Joe q. the art, while not as flashy as today, did look great for the time while giving more space for dialogue and story-telling. (thats all i ask for in a comic) these days, it could take 7 minutes to read a book. for three bucks, at least let it be 8 minutes long. also, with books like waldy the wanderer, who can go against the 80's?
Another thing worth mentioning is that these days, it is hard to have books like thor, or silver surfer. boneheads these days simply dont appreciate the good old times.

I DO agree about jerks like Joey Q going "spoil-happy" but seriously, unless you're a flipper it shouldn't take 7 minutes or less to go through a normal book unless you're just impatient. I set my own pacing to soak stuff in and I'll go through a single issue in maybe 18-22 minutes, and I'm not a slow reader...but I hear you loud and clear about spoilers!

[deemar325]

The 80's are the best period to me, It was like the heavens openned and guys like Alan Moore, Frank Miller, Neil Gaiman,Peter David and Grant Morrison came out the woodwork. Then you got stuff like 'Born Again',Swampthing,DKR,Hulk by David,Watchmen.

The 80's was the ****!!

Even cartoons then where the ****!

[rigel7soldiers]

I hate it that so many books are getting released with original concepts; such as "Y: The Last Man", or "Peanut Butter & Jeremy", or "The Goon"...it pisses me off so bad. I wish Jack Kirby and Stan Lee were still the only people doing anything that gets attention!

It sucks that labels such as Dark Horse and Black Bull among others have the opportunity to put out new and different stuff for people to read!

Black Bull is still around?
And as Elijya once told me, the "Last man on earth" thing is far from original. But seriously. You know, Dark Horse and Image are not the only independant publishers. Hell, they're the least independant of all of them.

Sure, Shadow Star and What is Michael and Who is the Moth and Four Letter Worlds and Feather probably should have gotten more attention. A lot more. But there's stuff that's just as good from Slave Labor and the like. (Little Gloomy, Serenity Rose, Pirate Club, Pistolwhip, etc.)

[livrule]

I DO agree about jerks like Joey Q going "spoil-happy" but seriously, unless you're a flipper it shouldn't take 7 minutes or less to go through a normal book unless you're just impatient. I set my own pacing to soak stuff in and I'll go through a single issue in maybe 18-22 minutes, and I'm not a slow reader...but I hear you loud and clear about spoilers!

7 minutes ???

Thats silly ......... Astonishing X-men takes 3-4 minutes .... tops!

[Prognosticator]

The 80's are the best period to me, It was like the heavens openned and guys like Alan Moore, Frank Miller, Neil Gaiman,Peter David and Grant Morrison came out the woodwork. Then you got stuff like 'Born Again',Swampthing,DKR,Hulk by David,Watchmen.

The 80's was the ****!!

Even cartoons then where the ****!

You are definitely throwing out the creme-de-lah-creme there in terms of writers, and some UNDISPUTED work from those creators...my stance was how much the artwork impacts books today, it's FAR better than 80s artwork, and the writers would tell you that themselves (save Frank Miller or Alan Moore)...but the 80s was a time of new-genesis in comics writing for sure!

[Ben Urich]

:eek:

I'm confined to DC and Marvel; the only indies I've read are Hellboy and Queen & Country.

[Anubis]

You should check out Invincible.

[UK_Stu]

It is my opinion that while many of today's artists are splashy and make great poster art panels, they unfortunately lack the ability to tell a story with their artwork... unlike comic book artists of the 70's.

So while it may look "pretty", sometimes it's difficult to follow.

And I doubt that yesyeryear's artists lacked "passion". :mad:

:)

I think you've got this spot on. Ok, a lot of the time it was simply panel after panel, rather than we large splashs we see today, but it certainly made the story more free flowing. Plus 80's stories weren't bogged with the idea that a story arc has to be the right length to fit into a TPB. They had sub plots too.

[Elijya]

Black Bull is still around?
And as Elijya once told me, the "Last man on earth" thing is far from original. But seriously. You know, Dark Horse and Image are not the only independant publishers. Hell, they're the least independant of all of them.

Sure, Shadow Star and What is Michael and Who is the Moth and Four Letter Worlds and Feather probably should have gotten more attention. A lot more. But there's stuff that's just as good from Slave Labor and the like. (Little Gloomy, Serenity Rose, Pirate Club, Pistolwhip, etc.)
no, Black Bull's not still around

(BTW, didn't know you were that much of an inide fan. If you like SLG, check out a book called Evenfall)

[Themanofbat]

I think you've got this spot on. Ok, a lot of the time it was simply panel after panel, rather than we large splashs we see today, but it certainly made the story more free flowing. Plus 80's stories weren't bogged with the idea that a story arc has to be the right length to fit into a TPB. They had sub plots too.

I miss sub-plots... :( :( :(

:(

[GNR]

When it comes to people getting into comics currently for the first time,there's no way you could get any of them to read through issues from the 70s and 80s.I've seen it.