|
Post by chadwilliam on May 21, 2023 13:15:51 GMT -5
Post-Crisis Joker. Let's turn a cross between Salvador Dali, Tom Baker as Dr. Who, and Moriarty into Jeffrey Dahmer with a crow-bar. Post-Crisis Superman. Superman for people who didn't like Superman. Percival Popp. Because The Spectre needs some slapstick in his life. Venom. A villain motivated by a desire to eat Spider-Man's brain. Nuff said!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2023 13:49:47 GMT -5
Post-Crisis Superman. Superman for people who didn't like Superman. Interestingly, I like pre-Crisis and post-Crisis Superman. He’s my favourite superhero!
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on May 21, 2023 14:44:48 GMT -5
I did enjoy the way Thanos grew up in things like Annihilation, and later in the three OGN that saw Warlock replace the Living Tribunal. Thanos had outgrown his emotional dependency on Death, had realized that he was not interested in godhood after all, and basically just wanted to live his life as he saw fit and pursue his interests in peace in a universe that wasn't about to disappear. He had gained a lot of wisdom, for all that he was still pretty amoral.
Naturally that wouldn't do, and other writers decided that he would just amass a new army to conquer Earth. Or rob a bank. Or whatever.
(For my money, though, Thanos's last appearance should have been in The Death of Captain Marvel GN, and that or Warlock in MtiO annual #2. It's better to quit while we're ahead).
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on May 21, 2023 15:13:04 GMT -5
I can say that I don't hate Thanos, but that's probably because I've read only a handful of stories he's been in. I've never liked Marvel's Cosmic books and have generally avoided them.
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on May 21, 2023 18:50:54 GMT -5
I can say that I don't hate Thanos, but that's probably because I've read only a handful of stories he's been in. I've never liked Marvel's Cosmic books and have generally avoided them. Starlin is the only one I enjoy in Marvel's cosmic realm and that is within limitations. Same thing with Metamorphosis Odyssey and Dreadstar. I like them within certain perameters. I kind of preferred the Universal Church of Truth warlock to the whole Thanos and the Soul Gems saga, that he finished up with Avengers and Marvel Two-in-One. The satire helps it from getting too pompous, though he still has moments of that. Other than that, i liked Kirby and Ditko's cosmic visuals, but not always the stories.
|
|
|
Post by berkley on May 21, 2023 19:18:43 GMT -5
I love the cosmic stuff myself, or the idea of it, at least - there's only a handful of guys who have done it well, for me: Englehart, early-'70s Starlin, Gerber, Ditko, Kirby. Sometimes it works better as an awe-inspiring background to a story rather than providing the main protagonists or motivations.
|
|
|
Post by tarkintino on May 22, 2023 7:01:14 GMT -5
Post-Crisis Superman. Superman for people who didn't like Superman. Post-COIE Superman was no longer the flawless, milk-drinking Mickey Mouse of the previous 30+ years, and turned into an interesting character again, last seen in his early Golden Age appearances. AKA Marvel's lowbrow phase of being influenced by the creatively questionable James Cameron and other mind-rotting sci-fi and action films of the 1980s.
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on May 22, 2023 7:14:04 GMT -5
I love the cosmic stuff myself, or the idea of it, at least - there's only a handful of guys who have done it well, for me: Englehart, early-'70s Starlin, Gerber, Ditko, Kirby. Sometimes it works better as an awe-inspiring background to a story rather than providing the main protagonists or motivations.Absolutely. Cosmic characters like the Celestials, Eternity or even Galactus only work if they're kept at a distance; the moment they use thought balloons or engage in fisticuffs with mere mortals, they lose their sense of awe-inspiring otherness. Repeated appearances are also bad for their brand. Familiarity breeds contempt and all that.
|
|
|
Post by chadwilliam on May 22, 2023 11:15:01 GMT -5
Post-Crisis Superman. Superman for people who didn't like Superman. Post-COIE Superman was no longer the flawless, milk-drinking Mickey Mouse of the previous 30+ years, and turned into an interesting character again, last seen in his early Golden Age appearances. There must have been a title I missed since I'm only familiar with what was going on in Superman, Action Comics, Adventures of Superman, and Superman: Man of Steel post-Crisis-wise.
|
|
|
Post by Chris on May 22, 2023 11:43:44 GMT -5
Ok, I'll ask. Honest question here, what was interesting about the revamped Superman? I want to know what people were getting out of the books.
|
|
|
Post by tarkintino on May 22, 2023 11:52:19 GMT -5
Ok, I'll ask. Honest question here, what was interesting about the revamped Superman? I want to know what people were getting out of the books. If by revamped you mean post-COIE, as I noted a few posts ago, Superman was no longer the flawless, milk-drinking Mickey Mouse of the previous 30+ years. He was allowed to act as if he was a part of the world with concerns and problems readers could understand, instead of being what he became during the worst of the Weisinger era: some bloated "icon" standing so far above the rest of the DCU that he rarely fit with the other characters because of the requirement to make him a safe, Mickey Mouse symbol.
|
|
|
Post by kirby101 on May 22, 2023 12:01:35 GMT -5
I found the pre-Crisis Superman too boring to read. I liked what Byrne did with him. And then the Carlin edited triangle books where the best period of Superman for me. I loved what Jurgens did with him and I liked all the artist on those books.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2023 13:36:31 GMT -5
Ok, I'll ask. Honest question here, what was interesting about the revamped Superman? I want to know what people were getting out of the books. I enjoyed the fact that Clark had a personality, that Ma and Pa Kent were alive, that Superman identified with his heritage. This will be a stretch (my analogies always suck), but my late father was born in Liverpool. He came to Birmingham at a very young age and stayed here until he passed away. He lost his accent, although it’d occasionally come out. He identified more with Birmingham. Years ago, I asked him if he missed Liverpool. He mentioned some great childhood memories, but never regretted moving to Birmingham. He told me that Birmingham had been good for/to him, and that he had never looked back. So, although it was not a major distraction, it was peculiar to see pre-Crisis say things like, “Great Rao!” Or pine over Krypton. I like that post-Crisis Superman at least felt more “American” and that his Kryptonian memories were curious mementoes of a life that might have been (I may be paraphrasing slightly). I do enjoy pre-Crisis Superman. I quite enjoyed some of the shenanigans between Clark and Steve Lombard, and there’s much entertainment value in reading an issue of, say, DC Comics Presents or World’s Finest Comics. It’s just that through 2023 eyes, pre-Crisis Clark had zero personality. Now, as a kid, I was not walking around saying, “Clark needs more personality.” But today, I can see pre-Crisis Clark/Superman does not, despite the entertainment value of the stories. I actually feel that Golden Age Clark has more personality, I’ve been reading a lot of issues (thank you, DC Infinite). There’s nothing particularly sophisticated, it is a continual loop of Clark and Lois looking to get a scoop, Clark trying to impress Lois, etc. I just feel Golden Age Clark has just a little bit more personality than Silver Age Clark.
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on May 22, 2023 21:23:10 GMT -5
Ok, I'll ask. Honest question here, what was interesting about the revamped Superman? I want to know what people were getting out of the books. I liked Bronze Age Superman; but the stories, as an average, were kind of played out and repetitive. I liked the Kents being alive for Clark to talk to and to give him some family, I liked the relationship with Lois being more mature, I liked the more layered use of the supporting cast, I liked the variety of threats he faced and the fact that they kept his powers within a mostly believable era and made him exert effort, now and then. I din't care for the antagonism with Batman, as it seemed too immature for either of them. I didn't care for the Billionnaire Lex, as I preferred the scientific genius. The Justice League cartoon had the best synthesis of both and the Superman TAS also made Lex a billionnaire, based on his own scientific genius. The best Lex, to me, was the one from Elliot Maggin's novels and how he wrote him, in the Bronze Age comics. I missed that. The Fortress wasn't that big of a deal, but I liked when they brought it back. Not a fan of the updated Krypton and didn't like Burnes designs. He has this thing about hard edges in his sci-fi designs that I find cold. I suppose that should make the colder, antiseptic version of Krypton work more for me; but, it didn't. Minor element, though. Mostly, I felt the overall writing was a better level of quality, that the supporting cast was more integrated and less cliched and that Clark was treated more as a real person and less as a bad cover. Clark Kent became more of a real person to me and that is how I always felt Superman would see himself: Clark is who he is, Superman is what he is called, when in the suit, and Ka-El is the birth name that seems foreign to him. I also liked the more dynamic art, though Jose Luis Garcia Lopez rocked Superman, in the Bronze Age; but was never going to be the regular artist on anything. I liked Curt Swan, especially when paired with Murphy Anderson; but, it needed new blood. I had more problems with Frank Miller's take on Batman and the subsequent follow through by others, than I did with Byrne's revamp of Superman. No problem with Dark Knight, except making Selina Kyle a madam and such a powerless character, as well as the way he treated Superman as a lackey for the US government (and the whole Ronnie thing, that far down the road). I hated the idea of Selina being an ex-prostitute/dominatrix in Year One and would say Frank Miller's fascination with prostitution and BDSM imagery says more about him than the characters. I really have more problems with those who followed Miller's ideas, than his execution, until he revisited Dark Knight and did the All-Star thing. I just felt the early 70s Batman was far more mature and interesting, which was still the Batman of Englehart and Rogers, which is my favorite run, outside of O'Neil & Adams. I just kind of felt Superman became more relatable and Batman less so. I was fine with Wonder Woman, other than having her arrive tot he world brand new, post JLA formation. That opened a whole can of worms. BNot as bad as Hawkman, but bad enough. I tend to look at any of these characters based more on specific stories, than long stretches. I found more Superman stories that I liked, in that era, vs the latter half of the 70s, apart from DC Comics Presents. I kind of feel that Julie Schwartz was holding things back. I love what was happening in the early 70s, with the soft reboot of Kryptonite No More and that whole run. However, it got dumped fairly quickly and then it was more about individual issues having a good hook. Plus, the way DC assigned inkers didn't help Curt Swan, as someone like Anderson livened up his pencils, compared to a lot of his inkers.
|
|
|
Post by Chris on May 22, 2023 22:41:45 GMT -5
If by revamped you mean post-COIE I generally avoid the term "post-crisis" for a few reasons, but one of them is because some DC characters had more than one post-crisis version. Hawkman, for example, was clearly set in the post-crisis world during the run of the Tony Isabella-written series, but a couple years later, it was written out and a new background given. Superman himself had stories published that were clearly set after the crisis but before the Man of Steel series relaunched the character, including a rather conflicted appearance in Booster Gold. My favorite, though, was Captain Atom. He appeared in an issue of DC Comics Presents that was clearly set post-crisis with his red-and-blue look from his Charlton Comics days. But that's not the funny thing. In the second issue of History of the DC Universe, we see Captain Atom here - Ok, all well and good so far. But several pages later, we this guy, who looks like he's made of metal with an atom symbol, but he's not identified - I had no idea who that guy was. but very soon after (like, a week or so at most), I saw that character again, in an ad for a new series called ... Captain Atom. So they published two post-crisis versions of Captain Atom, not just in the same book, but in the book that is supposed to be setting out the new, permanent, incontrovertible history of DC Comics. Well, I was amused. But for ease of discussion, I'll stop sperging and go with the "post-crisis" for now. He was allowed to act as if he was a part of the world with concerns and problems readers could understand, instead of being what he became during the worst of the Weisinger era: some bloated "icon" standing so far above the rest of the DCU that he rarely fit with the other characters because of the requirement to make him a safe, Mickey Mouse symbol I kind of get what you're saying here, but it still feels vague or opaque to me for some reason. I'm guessing you mean pre-crisis Superman was not relatable in any way? I found the pre-Crisis Superman too boring to read. I liked what Byrne did with him. And then the Carlin edited triangle books where the best period of Superman for me. I loved what Jurgens did with him and I liked all the artist on those books. If you liked the books, that's great, glad you enjoyed them, but it doesn't tell me anything about why you found the post-crisis version of Superman interesting, or the pre-crisis version so boring. my late father was born in Liverpool. He came to Birmingham at a very young age and stayed here until he passed away. He lost his accent, although it’d occasionally come out. He identified more with Birmingham. Years ago, I asked him if he missed Liverpool. He mentioned some great childhood memories, but never regretted moving to Birmingham. He told me that Birmingham had been good for/to him, and that he had never looked back. So, although it was not a major distraction, it was peculiar to see pre-Crisis say things like, “Great Rao!” Or pine over Krypton. I like that post-Crisis Superman at least felt more “American” and that his Kryptonian memories were curious mementoes of a life that might have been I get that. I've known people like that. But for someone like Superman, whose birthplace is another planet, and given that being born there gives him enormous power on Earth, seems like he would be at least somewhat curious and want to dig deep into his history and reflect on it occasionally, rather than just pondering it briefly and dismissing it as "meaningless" as Byrne's Superman did. And I cannot imagine there would not be some pain once he discovered all this, knowing that he is the very last one of them alive. I'm not saying he would automatically want to live on Krypton, and in fact pre-crisis once the Kryptonian city of Kandor was enlarged and placed on a planet of its own, Superman did NOT move there but stayed on Earth, but Krypton should be more to him than just a "curious memento." there’s much entertainment value in reading an issue of, say, DC Comics Presents or World’s Finest Comics Agreed there. Those books often had awesome stories of a type that rarely saw print in the regular Superman titles. pre-Crisis Clark had zero personality I see this one come up a lot, and I can only conclude I have a different idea about "personality" than most comics readers. Then again, it could be referring to the concept that even in-story, Clark was often perceived as having no personality, which was a very conscious decision on Superman's part (it was funny to sometimes see Clark going out of his way to be exceptionally uninteresting to people for various reasons). (Side note: I see that complaint about zero personality about the Barry Allen version of Flash too. I can only guess it has something to do with both of them being primarily written for a long time by Cary Bates.) I do have a question though. I'm not trying to be hair-slpitting here, but you wrote "I enjoyed the fact that Clark had a personality, that Ma and Pa Kent were alive, that Superman identified with his heritage." But then you also wrote "I like that post-Crisis Superman at least felt more “American” and that his Kryptonian memories were curious mementoes of a life that might have been." Maybe I am misreading something here, but that sounds to me like he is clearly not identifying with his heritage. Do you mean he identified with his adopted family's culture? There were some post-crisis stories I liked, and I did read the various books intermittently in the early 90s. But to me, there just seemed to be so much unused potential just lying there inert. Just my opinion.
|
|