|
Post by Nowhere Man on Sept 14, 2017 8:50:14 GMT -5
I'll just chime in to say that the concept of subjectivity and art is something that has interested me for a long time now. The common understanding seems to be that art is subjective and if it speaks to you, that's that. But there is also the "objective" reality of consensus.
There are classical music fans who think that Mozart is overrated and rock fans who feel the same way about The Beatles. That said, the majority of critics and fans feel that they both represent the pinnacle (or close to it) of the respective art forms and point out that their influence is unmatched. Personally, I feel that influence can't be argued, or that it's the closest thing to the objective in art. What I think it comes down to is what you value more: the opinion and tastes of the individual or the opinions and tastes of the group. I'm not sure if there is a definite answer but it's something that I think about frequently.
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on Sept 14, 2017 7:26:04 GMT -5
... It's interesting because even though Batman and Spider-Man have equaled, or even surpassed, Superman in certain ways in terms of character popularity, even their symbols lag far behind in terms of iconic status. Probably because the Superman insignia is its own unique thing and, even with modifications over the years, stays that way. The bat and spider are their own things out of context and could just as well be Halloween decorations. And as used as symbols of the characters, have changed more than Supes' shield. (Granted, I don't read any new superhero comics and haven't for years, but if you asked me to draw the Spider-Man symbol, I wouldn't come up with anything remotely like the one above.) I think that's true. I also think that it has sometime to do with the fact that, compared to those two totemic symbols, the Superman symbol isn't directly based on nature, coming more directly from human imagination and symbology. I view it sort of like the coat-of-arms for human empowerment.
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on Sept 14, 2017 7:22:36 GMT -5
The lightning symbol has no single owner. There is also Flash Gordon, who predates them all.
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on Sept 14, 2017 7:20:22 GMT -5
I honestly don't see why Marvel bothers with network shows in this modern age. Because even in "this modern age", not everyone has Netflix, which means there is a whole segment of the audience that they still want to reach with their programming. As well, the network shows tend to skew more PG (maybe PG-13), while none of the MU Netflix shows could make it in that format without serious changes that would compromise the integrity of the story. They're easier to get off the ground because they are different in two major ways, both of which are positive: 1. They are only 10-13 episodes, instead of the network model of 22. This is where cable/streaming shows shine, in that they tell a tight story without having to pad out a season with filler episodes. Supernatural has suffered from this for years, with each season having at least 5-6 throwaway episodes that aren't any good, don't bear rewatching, and slow the pace of the season down. A show like Stranger Things, with 8 episodes, got down to business and told a great story without wasting time. 2. Cable and streaming services start their shows whenever they want. Game of Thrones Season 7 began in late July, while if that were a network show, they would have held the premiere until September or October. By being able to air shows whenever they are done production, instead of keeping to the old model based on "Sweeps Months" and the like, the cable/streaming shows can be put out to the public much faster. Bonus thought. The other advantage that streaming has, by and large, is they release entire seasons at a time. We don't have to wait from September through May to get an entire season. From day one, we have access to all of the episodes, so we can binge it or slow roll it or get to it when we want, meaning we are in control. I binged DD Season 1 in about 4 days, then did JJ Season 1 in about 10. I moved on to other things, and when DD Season 2 dropped, I wrapped up my other shows and blew through that in less than two weeks. Things seem fresher because we aren't forced to wait seven days between episodes releasing and 8-9 months for the season's payoff. I agree with all this, but to clarify my comment, I don't think the demographic that still watches ABC, at least in any significant numbers, is the right one to be targeting with a series like Inhuman's. It's my understanding that all the major networks skew older than the various streaming services. Plus, even though Inhuman's is under the Marvel banner, the typical fair that I still see on the network's are a few straggling bland sitcoms, cop and doctors shows and stuff like the return of Will & Grace. To my mind Inhuman's is still niche to the majority of network TV watchers who seem to be very "mainstream" in their tastes. I could very well be off-base here, of course.
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on Sept 13, 2017 9:21:21 GMT -5
Punisher (vol 2) #1-59 Issue #60 is where Mike Barron (who I think was at the height of his booger sugar phase during this time) turned the Punisher black by having him visit a prostitute who also happened to be a world class underground pigmentation surgeon (yes...really). Wow. Never knew about this. I think I only had the Jim Lee issues of Punisher back in the late 80's. Could you imagine someone pulling this in the social media age?
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on Sept 13, 2017 9:20:00 GMT -5
I agree. I'd never rate it as a "classic" even though it's still probably the third best Thor run (I say this having never read the bulk of 70's Thor by the likes of Wein, etc.) I think there is a place for good "status quo" runs when it comes to mainstream comics, but it's certainly not something you'd want to see cemented for all eternity. Even Byrne's FF, which on the surface was a back-to-basics approach, soon branched out and expanded on the characters of Galactus, Doctor Doom, Invisible Woman, etc. I like/love ALL the Thor eras except maybe when Warren Ellis and Deodato made him into a male stripper . Those were dark days indeed. It still amazes me how far into 90's Marvel I continued to read long after things had gone sour...
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on Sept 13, 2017 9:18:27 GMT -5
I honestly don't see why Marvel bothers with network shows in this modern age. With the exception of Iron Fist, the Netflix shows have been praised by fans and critics, and they seem easier to get off the ground seeing as how we have FIVE complete series now.
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on Sept 13, 2017 8:29:19 GMT -5
I've looked at several lists on the subject and the Superman symbol ranks with the Holy Cross, the Coca Cola logo, McDonald's Golden Arches, the Swastika and the Olympic logo in terms of world-wide recognition. It's interesting because even though Batman and Spider-Man have equaled, or even surpassed, Superman in certain ways in terms of character popularity, even their symbols lag far behind in terms of iconic status.
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on Sept 13, 2017 0:12:10 GMT -5
Without question those are the two greatest eras of Thor, but I have a soft spot for the first half of the DeFalco/Frenz Thor run. I was never a big fan of the Eric Masterson era, but I REALLY liked The Black Galaxy Saga. Sure, they were basically doing a Lee/Kirby pastiche, but it was a darn good one. That said, Masterson was a regression from Lee/Kirby's eventual conclusion: Thor doesn't need an actual mortal identity. A good imitation of a classic is just that, an imitation, not a classic. It can still be entertaining and enjoyable, but something like that falls way short of my standard for a classic. I'd rather see creators emulate the creativity and vision of someone like Kirby than imitate the end result of what ended up on the page because of that vision and creativity. I'd rather read Kirby than a watered down imitation of Kirby any day of the week, no matter how good the imitation is. But that standard for me applies across the board, and stuff that may be "good" or "entertaining" comics are not classics to me if all they're doing is playing around in someone else's sandbox and coloring well within the lines without having any true vision or purpose but to be a shadow of what came before. -M I agree. I'd never rate it as a "classic" even though it's still probably the third best Thor run (I say this having never read the bulk of 70's Thor by the likes of Wein, etc.) I think there is a place for good "status quo" runs when it comes to mainstream comics, but it's certainly not something you'd want to see cemented for all eternity. Even Byrne's FF, which on the surface was a back-to-basics approach, soon branched out and expanded on the characters of Galactus, Doctor Doom, Invisible Woman, etc.
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on Sept 12, 2017 19:45:45 GMT -5
Thor has 2 classic eras for me, the first starts with Kirby's return to the book and the launch of Tales of Asgard as the back-up feature through Kirby's departure, and the second is the Simonson era starting with #337 and ending when Walt left. Without question those are the two greatest eras of Thor, but I have a soft spot for the first half of the DeFalco/Frenz Thor run. I was never a big fan of the Eric Masterson era, but I REALLY liked The Black Galaxy Saga. Sure, they were basically doing a Lee/Kirby pastiche, but it was a darn good one. That said, Masterson was a regression from Lee/Kirby's eventual conclusion: Thor doesn't need an actual mortal identity.
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on Sept 12, 2017 7:09:14 GMT -5
Incredible Hulk #179-300.
This is a tough one because having read the series all the way to the end of the Peter David run, I do like post-#300 Incredible Hulk a lot (the Crossroads saga, the six Byrne issues, Mr. Fixit era, Professor Hulk/Pantheon etc.) but it never again returned to the "classic" Hulk that took off thematically when Len Wein started writing the book in 1974.
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on Sept 11, 2017 1:02:54 GMT -5
One of the things I liked about this version by BWS was how he made Yara's shrinking into the Heart of the Elephant less comical than the original Howard version. Maybe it's just a fault of my imagination in this instance, but the idea of Yara running around on the table at action-figure size was always kinda silly for an otherwise classic pulp tale. It's been so long, I must admit that I don't recall that bit. But certainly I don't remember anything comical about the story, unless it was a bit between Conan and the girl he was rescuing (again, I could be mixing it up with another story altogether). Sorry, I was talking about the original Robert E. Howard story and how he described Yara shrinking down and scurrying around the table at miniature size.
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on Sept 11, 2017 0:11:42 GMT -5
One of the comics I'd love to own one day! This story was adapted three times, up to now: once in CtB, once in SSoC (with art by Buscema and Alcala) and once in DarkHorse's Conan, script by Busiek and art by Nord. I feel that this, the first adaptation, remains the superior one... even if it counts the fewer pages. It's the one that had the most exotic and weird atmosphere, the one that blended action and mysticism the best. Yara did look a little generic as wizards go... But this was CtB #4. He was setting the trend! I liked the way he looked a bit old, too. This is totally from my distant memories of reading them in the 70s, so I can't place too much reliance on it, but my recollection is that the SSoC adaptation wasn't one of the best efforts from the always amazing Buscema/Alcala team. It was excellent, because they were never less than that, but from the images of the story in my head, they didn't make as much use of shadow and light as usual, everything was a little brighter and lacking in contrast and hence less dramatic than in their best stuff. I'll have to dig it out one of these days and give it another look. The BWS version, again from long-ago memories, made a bigger impression. In particular - and I hope I'm not mixing this up with some completely different story - the rendering of the winged man was really special, with BWS managing to convey a sense of the almost unbearable melancholy and loneliness of this stranded being, the last of his kind (again, if I'm recalling this correctly). One of the things I liked about this version by BWS was how he made Yara's shrinking into the Heart of the Elephant less comical than the original Howard version. Maybe it's just a fault of my imagination in this instance, but the idea of Yara running around on the table at action-figure size was always kinda silly for an otherwise classic pulp tale.
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on Sept 10, 2017 17:45:47 GMT -5
I've been following him on twitter for a few years now and I'd noticed that he was in and out of the hospital on a frequent basis. Sad news. His run on Incredible Hulk is among my all-time favorites.
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on Sept 10, 2017 12:11:01 GMT -5
Fantastic Four #26 and Avengers #5 The main thing that's interesting about these two issues is that the events of FF #26 lead directly into the events of Avengers #5, marking the first real effort at "cross continuity" between titles. The FF and Avengers battling the Hulk and getting in each others way gave the story an extra dramatic wrinkle but it's the continuity between these two issues that made this "feel" like the Marvel Universe, really for the first time.
|
|