How Many of you Actually Read Comics???

[LexCorp]

DC:
Ronin
Batman: Year One
Legends of the Dark Knight
No Man's Land
Batman & Son
Batman: The Dark Knight Returns
Batman: The Dark Knight Strikes Again
Batman: Hush
The Death of Superman
Kingdom Come
Superman: Last Son
Superman: Birthright
52

Many, Many more!

Marvel:
Ultimate Spider-Man
Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man
Blade
Annihalation
World War Hulk
Planet Hulk
Blade
Fantastic Four
Civil War

Many, Many more!

Darkhourse comics I also read....

 

[redmarvel]

You're awesome

t: Thanks, but my memory was playing tricks on me yesterday... I left out Iron Man and the Hulk, also the "What If" comics, I love the "What If" comics.

 

[redmarvel]

Gee golly whiz, how many Spider-Man titles are there these days?

Amazing Spider-Man, Peter Parker the Spectacular Spider-Man, Marvel-Tales Starring Spider-Man, Marvel Team-Up Featuring Spider-Man, Web of Spider-Man, Spider-Man 2099, Spider-Man, Spectacular Spider-Man...

Talk about milking a franchise.

 

[strikezone89]

i dont read comics
i live them
lol

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Gee golly whiz, how many Spider-Man titles are there these days?

Amazing Spider-Man, Peter Parker the Spectacular Spider-Man, Marvel-Tales Starring Spider-Man, Marvel Team-Up Featuring Spider-Man, Web of Spider-Man, Spider-Man 2099, Spider-Man, Spectacular Spider-Man...

Talk about milking a franchise.

four.

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

They are a joke, but their IMPACT was huge.
You do realize New Mutants and X-Force were very small, critically panned, and cancelled series.

Irrelevant. You do know that Macfarlane's run on Spider-Man broke sales records and and everyone ran around crapping themselves to try and reproduce that mind-boggling success?

lol, you have a funny thing where one example becomes the be-all-end-all.
If there was an intertwining story-line in the 70's, then intertwining storylines can't be used to characterize any other decade, if X-Force was a flop, then Liefeld had no impact on comics at all.
Hahaha, you ask me to read history and get back to you, which is hilarious as:
1) In 1991, I was an avid comicbook collector and reader, and I was 20 years old. How old were you in 1991?

2) I just happen to have recently bought 2 books, one about the career of John Romita, and one called "The Dark Age" about what happened to comics in the 90's, both extensively researched, bursting with interviews with industry big-wigs, and, um......you're really full of it and, as usual, are so eager to argue with me that you're not making sense.

As shown here:

Being "dark" came from Frank Miller and Alan Moore with DKR and Watchmen respectively. MacFarlane and Liefield had absolutely nothing to do with it.

Hahahaha, what an outrageous over-simplification. No, , being "dark" did NOT "come from" DKR and Watchmen.
They helped to bring "Darkness" into vogue...in the EIGHTIES.

THEN, it became the NORM, in the NINETIES, without the substance, mindless mimicry, THAT'S what I'm complaining about.

EC Comics were MORE dark than the 80's, decades earlier. The first freaking issue of Batman was "dark".
You just murdered your credibility.

and cramming a ton of meaningless lines into the artwork

You mean...uh...detail .

Yes and No.
Too busy with the detail, and also, no, sometimes just meaningless chicken scratches, the product of a talentless hack trying to create the impression of detail.

You realize Spider-Man had about 4 titles when Wolverine first appeared and the Avengers had 4 or 5 spinoffs.

weirdly irrelevant.

Batman, Superman, Spider-Man, Fantastic Four, and Avengers have all enjoyed multiple titles long before the 90s and long before Wolverine.

I'm shaking my head.
Anyway, I'm reminded of a funny article I read once where the guy said, "For a dark, mysterious loner, Wolverine sure joins a lot of Teams."

Did Batman suck in the 60s when Denny O'Neil wrote him, because he appeared in Justice League, Brave and the Bold, World's Finest, Detective Comics and Batman at that time (at The Outsiders not too long after)

You're asking the wrong guy because I've never like Superman, Batman or Spider-Man. I read a ton of those old comics and the answer is, some sucked ass, some were really good. Still irrelevant.

The 70s was worse than the 90s in quality and sales. Anyone who has ever read a Defenders comic can explain to you why.

Wrong.

I'm really not alone in that opinion, it's pretty widely held.

No, comic fans just like to complain about what they buy.

Uh, NO to your no. lol. Tons of people feel that way and the fact that comic fans are nitpicky whiners doesn't negate the fact that they feel that way. This would be another example of where you're not making any sense.

And don't think events are overhyped anymore than they used to be. Spider-Man, or his girlfriend, or his Aunt or his best friend faced death, destruction or harm every single issue when Stan Lee wrote the book. People only think the nature of the medium changes, but really it doesn't.

Ridiculous.
I'm reading interview after interview with people who created comics from the 60's to the 90's, and people who created from the 90's to the present...all of them acknowledgeing the changes I'm talking about, but, Shadowboxing knows better than them. lol
You can NOT compare Dark Phoenix or the Brood thing to Civil War, 52 or House of M.
The universe-wide, nothing will ever be the same, story's playing out in every single title-thing is what I'm talking about.

And my point isn't that giant crossover events are bad. I'm not talking about the events, I'm talking about the FREQUENCY, and it's impossible to deny that the frequency is ridiculously high now.

It's like, the giant explosion of the Death Star at the end of Star Wars was so cool and satisfying, SO, let's write a movie where it's NOTHING but giant things exploding!
YEAH!
Well, that movie would suck pale, hairy ass.

That has been around a lot longer than you're giving it credit for. Spider-Man and Fantastic Four had tons of intertwining storylines, always.

Again, You are just completely missing like, every point I'm making.


In closing, I don't "need to read about the history of comics", I LIKE to. It's all I do now because I'm mainly interested in old comics. Also, I WATCHED it. I SAW the changes from the 70's and 80's, when I was heavily into comics, and then, I didn't wake up onr morning in the 90's and say, "I'm going to stop buying comics now because the 90's suck."

I WANTED to buy comics, but stopped because they started to suck. The major trends were getting lamer and lamer, and the stuff I disliked, is in full swing today, as I hear something's good, read it out of curiosity and find that, no, it still sucks, and I look at the stand, and all the art is too slick for my tastes.

 

[BRUTAL]

No one will actually read all of that Wil.

To most it looks like:

Spoiler

 

[Figs]

I started reading comics when I was in middle school around '92. I stopped after those 3 years once I got into High school, guess I kinda lost interest at the time. Around 2001/2002 is when I got my interest back in them and have been recollecting the old issues I had sold as well as getting the ones I never had.

 

[AndThePickles]

No one will actually read all of that Wil.

To most it looks like:

Spoiler

t:

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Irrelevant. You do know that Macfarlane's run on Spider-Man broke sales records and and everyone ran around crapping themselves to try and reproduce that mind-boggling success?

Aside from Bagley, no one really. Romita Jr. didn't copy his style. Neither did Jim Lee, or Alex Ross, or any of the other in vogue artists of the 90s...and forget about the millenium. Almost no one I can think of copies the works of Todd MacFarlane anymore.

lol, you have a funny thing where one example becomes the be-all-end-all.

No, that'd be you.

If there was an intertwining story-line in the 70's, then intertwining storylines can't be used to characterize any other decade, if X-Force was a flop, then Liefeld had no impact on comics at all.

He didn't. No really, he didn't. I don't know what drug you took that gave you this impressive, but it's a strong one.

Hahaha, you ask me to read history and get back to you, which is hilarious as:
1) In 1991, I was an avid comicbook collector and reader, and I was 20 years old. How old were you in 1991?

Old enough to have five long boxes

2) I just happen to have recently bought 2 books, one about the career of John Romita, and one called "The Dark Age" about what happened to comics in the 90's, both extensively researched, bursting with interviews with industry big-wigs, and, um......you're really full of it and, as usual, are so eager to argue with me that you're not making sense.

Yeah I have about 20 books on comics, and work for a website that chronicles comic history.

As shown here:



Hahahaha, what an outrageous over-simplification. No, , being "dark" did NOT "come from" DKR and Watchmen.
They helped to bring "Darkness" into vogue...in the EIGHTIES.

Yes, that's what I said.

THEN, it became the NORM, in the NINETIES, without the substance, mindless mimicry, THAT'S what I'm complaining about.

And the ninties are long over, and they weren't about Dark. Cable, Bishop, Punisher. That's what the ninties was about. "X-Treme" heroes who carried big guns and had mullets. Those days are loooonnnnngggg over and have NO influence on comics today. Liefield, again, though had nothing to do with this trend...

Yes and No.
Too busy with the detail, and also, no, sometimes just meaningless chicken scratches, the product of a talentless hack trying to create the impression of detail.

Again, most comic artists today aren't really talentless hacks...no more so than the 60s, 70s, 80s or 90s. Their are talentless hacks, but then there is Steve Epting (Captain America)

John Cassady (Astonishing X-Men)

John Romita Jr. (World War Hulk, Eternals, Spider-Man)

Gary Frank(Action Comics, Supreme Power, Incredible Hulk)

Those guys ae the top billed artists of today. NOT Rob Liefield or Todd MacFarlane. They don't look like hacks to me.

I'm shaking my head.
Anyway, I'm reminded of a funny article I read once where the guy said, "For a dark, mysterious loner, Wolverine sure joins a lot of Teams."

Comics have been filled with logical inconsistencies like that for a while. But Wolverine was part of Alpha Flight before joining X-Men, and Weapon X before that. He is a joiner, he just enjoys acting like he doesn't need people.

You're asking the wrong guy because I've never like Superman, Batman or Spider-Man. I read a ton of those old comics and the answer is, some sucked ass, some were really good. Still irrelevant.

Your point was back in the day when you wanted to read comics about Wolverine Marvel made you read X-Men, and then they tried to capitalize on his cool and it went to hell...when the truth is you missed that boat by about 20 or 30 years.

Wrong.

Nope it's correct

Comics sales slumped in the recession of the early '50s and again in the recession of the early '70s. There was an uptick in the early '90s

Uh, NO to your no. lol. Tons of people feel that way and the fact that comic fans are nitpicky whiners doesn't negate the fact that they feel that way. This would be another example of where you're not making any sense.

No, actually it makes perfect sense. Comic fans wrote in complaint letter way back in the 60s too, you might go unearth a few. The fact is comics sales and popularity indicate otherwise. They are more plentiful, and titles aren't going on bi-monthly schedules anymore to save money. Their are also more companies now, and more interest generated in each title. You never would have been able to sell a book like Black Panther or Ultimates back in the 70s, because the ability to get the book out their and known simply was no available.

Ridiculous.
I'm reading interview after interview with people who created comics from the 60's to the 90's, and people who created from the 90's to the present...all of them acknowledgeing the changes I'm talking about, but, Shadowboxing knows better than them. lol
You can NOT compare Dark Phoenix or the Brood thing to Civil War, 52 or House of M. :ugh:

I didn't compare them on any other grounds than that they are all mega-events. However Dark Phoenix Saga is certainly comprable to Bendis' run on DareDevil or Walking Dead. And Dark Phoenix Saga wasn't exactly the norm either back in the day. They had the first Clone Saga in the 70s too, and that was atrocious. They had the Defenders, which could never, in all the books I read hold my attention. They had Batman move to a penthouse in Gotham and they ditched the batmobile and the martial arts in attempt to make him 'more realistic'. That was pathetic. Marvel created all those blaxpoitation characters. Not everything they touched was gold, and in the eighties many, many of those mega-events like Acts of Vengence, Atlantis Attacks, Secret Wars 2, Fall of the Mutants and the Incredible Hulk (Bryne run) were all a far cry from Phoenix if not very bad works of writing.

True the 90s was bad, but you're trying to paste it's failures onto today's comics which is simply not true. It's been a decade since Heroes Return.

And my point isn't that giant crossover events are bad. I'm not talking about the events, I'm talking about the FREQUENCY, and it's impossible to deny that the frequency is ridiculously high now.

The X-Men events in the eighties happened about 5 or 6 issues apart. Events, in great frequency have been a staple since the first Kree/Skrull war. Every year comics have been around in Marvel and DC since their major comebacks in the 60s their has been some "event" in either the comic itself or in the Universe in general. People who think otherwise are simply painting a rose colored world for themselves.

It's like, the giant explosion of the Death Star at the end of Star Wars was so cool and satisfying, SO, let's write a movie where it's NOTHING but giant things exploding!
YEAH!

Few comics today follow that sort of logic...except maybe "The Human Bomb"

Well, that movie would suck pale, hairy ass.

None.of.those.artists.I.posted.write.in.titles.that.do.that.

 

[BRUTAL]

Spoiler

VS

 

[redmarvel]

No one will actually read all of that Wil.

To most it looks like:

Spoiler

Actually I read all of that. The 90's were the Dark Ages of Marvel Comics. Too much death and destruction in all the various lines. Inferno, Maximum Carnage, and so on... I prefer a more upbeat take where the good guys succeed in saving lives instead of getting each other killed. Didn't they kill off Thor in the 90's too?

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Here are some more awful Liefield impersonators
Bryan Hitch (Ultimates, untitled new project)

Oliver Copiel (Thor, various)

Tony S. Daniel (Teen Titans, JSA, Flash, various DC projects)

Mike McKone (Fantastic Four, Teen Titans, Green Lantern)

Chris Bachalo (X-Men, Spider-Man, various marvel)

Phil Jimenez (various DC, Spider-Man, NewXMen)

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Actually I read all of that. The 90's were the Dark Ages of Marvel Comics. Too much death and destruction in all the various lines. Inferno, Maximum Carnage, and so on... I prefer a more upbeat take where the good guys succeed in saving lives instead of getting each other killed. Didn't they kill off Thor in the 90's too?

Inferno was the eighties. Thor died during Avengers Disassembled (2003). And no one, to my knowledge, died in Maximum Carnage.

The 90s big missteps were as follows
*The Clone Saga (2): A follow up to the original clone saga in Amazing Spider-Man 140(s). Basically the clone Parker had survived and dawned a new identity, the Scarlet Spider. As the story progressed we learned that the clone Parker we thought had died was in fact the real Parker and the one who had been kicking around for the past 250 issues or so was in fact the clone.
*Batman Broken: Bane breaks Batman's back and he is replaced with an uber violent, Punisher-esque version of himself in lethal bodyarmor. Batman X-Treme
*Superman Blue/Red: Superman was put in a blue/red costume and given electricity related powers...'nuff said.
*Onslaught: Essentially the physic resonance of Magneto and Xavier battling manifested into a monster who killed off the Fantastic Four, Avengers and Hulk. They were put into a God awful 'Heroes Reborn' Universe and the Marvel Universe essentially became 6 Spider-Man titles and like 10 X-Men titles...because if it ain't X-Men and Spider-Man I guess we can't sell it.
*Wolverine de-evolved: Wolverine is basically turned into a walking man-ape for n extended period of time...so, uh, yeah.
*Also just introducing a bunch of extreme characters with big guns ad giving everyone mullets.

The 90s also featured the "Death/Return of Superman". But, in general, this was a storyline that was critically and financially a complete success...so it's hard to write it off.

Other things include:
Amalgam
Kingdom Come
X-Men (Adjectiveless)
The Return of Spider-Man's parents

 

[Prognosticator]

**worn out after reading yesterday/today's debate in full**

 

[BRUTAL]

The 90s big missteps were as follows
*Batman Broken: Bane breaks Batman's back and he is replaced with an uber violent, Punisher-esque version of himself in lethal bodyarmor. Batman X-Treme

The Knightfall Novelization was tremendously written and furthered my interest in the character.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

The Knightfall Novelization was tremendously written and furthered my interest in the character.

Eh...I was never really a fan of it. But I know people who got into comics in the 90s and swear by Infinite Guanlet and Death of Superman moreso than some swear by Kirby and Lee.

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

Man I hate it when I'm in the middle of bickering and my computer breaks RIGHT as I'm trying to respond.

Anyway, this isn't something you can "win", Shadowboxing.
I like the aesthetic sensibility of comics from the 50's, and the 60's, and the 70's, and some of the 80's, and I hate the aesthetic sense of comics from the 90's, and the 00's.

The art you posted is not what I was talking about when I was commenting on the senseless chicken scratching from the 90's. All of the artists you posted are of course really talented, but all of that art makes me ill. I hate it.
Notice how almost every pic you posted has glowing light effects and the illusion of airbrush work?
I hate that s***.


I look at a polular artist like Jim Lee.

I hate how hard th^t is trying to impress you. Look at Catwoman's right upper/inner thigh!
There's 5 striations of tendon and muscle visible there, in the "sexy" girl's thigh.
That's effing repulsive. I hate the mixture of line art and sort of realistic stuff (how the clouds look real and aren't line art).
I like very simple, solid planes of color, and bold lines, and an almost naive, innocent quality to the art and stories.


I will always prefer this:

To that dark, adult, serious crap.
It's C.O.M.I.C.-B.O.O.K.S.!

But, like I said, I'm a pervert, and I like warped, evil stuff. There's a balance between traditionalism and revolution, and for my tastes, it was perfectly attained in the 80's, and now, it's out of balance, for me.
You can't "prove me wrong".
There a clear difference between the 2 Batman pics I posted. I like the second one and hate the first one. *shrugola*

 

[Victarion]

Occasionally:

Hellboy-really behind, haven't picked up a GN in a couple of years. The local bookstore never had The Conqueror Worm. Last Christmas I came close to picking up Stranger Places. Flipped through it and saw a lot of familiar faces:Hecate, Daoin Sidh, Baba Yaga, most noteably.

Batman TLH and DV-On recommendations from other posters here. I loved the character and designs of Two-Face and Grundy here, as well as the designs of Scarecrow and Ivy. Not so much their Riddler, Joker, or Catwoman.

I'm working on my own right now, storywise. Artwise, I need to find an illustrator.

 

[sinewave]

wilhelm, you should check out darwyn cooke's work "dc's the new frontier" (written and drawn by cooke) and early "catwoman" (written by ed brubaker, drawn by cooke), along with the art of sean phillips on "criminal" (written by ed brubaker; won eisner award for best new series and best writer), michael lark on "daredevil" (also written by brubaker) and steve epting on "captain america" (written, yet again, by brubaker). their styles rely more on simple lines and atmosphere than flash and anatomical extremes.

can you tell i like brubaker's work?

 

[ShadowBoxing]

I posted Epting. I think he's just convinced comics suck now...even though that is a Batman comic featuring Bruce's Aunt *shrug*.

 

[sinewave]

oh, aunt agatha, you sassy old *****!

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

wilhelm, you should check out darwyn cooke's work "dc's the new frontier" (written and drawn by cooke) and early "catwoman" (written by ed brubaker, drawn by cooke), along with the art of sean phillips on "criminal" (written by ed brubaker; won eisner award for best new series and best writer), michael lark on "daredevil" (also written by brubaker) and steve epting on "captain america" (written, yet again, by brubaker). their styles rely more on simple lines and atmosphere than flash and anatomical extremes.

can you tell i like brubaker's work?

Yeah, I know all about Darwyn. And of course I like Bruce Timm, or Steve Rude, or whoever the dude is that just blatantly rips off Jack Kirby (I saw some really good stuff he did in an Amalgam comic years ago.). And Mike Allred is one of my favorites.

But the reason I like them is because they ape the old days with that clean retro style. They are popular in the 00's, but it's not a style that you call "00's". It's intentionally retro.
I like them because I prefer the past.


What it reminds me of is, I like new bands that are obviously so influenced by old music that they sound like old music, like The White Stripes, Jet (at times), that one good song by the Darkness, Kings of Leon, etc.

But I'll still always prefer the real deal, the Led Zeppelin to The White Stripes, the Queen to the one good Darkness song, the AC/DC or Stones to Jet.



But, thanks for understanding what I'm talking about as far as clean/simple style (which I still would never use to characterize "The Scene" in the 90's or today) and for the recommendations.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

oh, aunt agatha, you sassy old *****!

Talk about the dark ages. The 50s *shudder*. Wertham can really go suck a d*** for what he did back then.

 

[sinewave]

Yeah, I know all about Darwyn. And of course I like Bruce Timm, or Steve Rude, or whoever the dude is that just blatantly rips off Jack Kirby (I saw some really good stuff he did in an Amalgam comic years ago.). And Mike Allred is one of my favorites.

But the reason I like them is because they ape the old days with that clean retro style. They are popular in the 00's, but it's not a style that you call "00's". It's intentionally retro.
I like them because I prefer the past.


What it reminds me of is, I like new bands that are obviously so influenced by old music that they sound like old music, like The White Stripes, Jet (at times), that one good song by the Darkness, Kings of Leon, etc.

But I'll still always prefer the real deal, the Led Zeppelin to The White Stripes, the Queen to the one good Darkness song, the AC/DC or Stones to Jet.



But, thanks for understanding what I'm talking about as far as clean/simple style (which I still would never use to characterize "The Scene" in the 90's or today) and for the recommendations.

no problem. i get what you're saying, though i can't stand jet.

you know which artist doesn't get enough work and combines some of the attributes of the more "classic" artists with some of the more modern, "slick" artists? kevin nowlan. that dude's art really appeals to me. here's his latest cover for the metamorpho: year one mini that just hit the shelves.

here's another i found through "the googles".

he's got a similar style to allred, in my opinion.