|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2014 19:53:54 GMT -5
Too many to mention. Just this week I teared up reading Daredevil #5 (current volume).
|
|
|
Post by dupersuper on Jul 10, 2014 19:57:09 GMT -5
Too many to mention. Just this week I teared up reading Daredevil #5 (current volume). Oh oh: that's in my pile of new books for tonight.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2014 20:00:15 GMT -5
Too many to mention. Just this week I teared up reading Daredevil #5 (current volume). What a great comic that was. Every time I start to take Waid's DD for granted, they drop another classic
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2014 20:04:38 GMT -5
Too many to mention. Just this week I teared up reading Daredevil #5 (current volume). Oh oh: that's in my pile of new books for tonight. It was inspiring.
|
|
|
Post by comicscube on Jul 14, 2014 22:58:45 GMT -5
Waid's DD is just so consistently good that there's almost nothing to talk about. "Oh, yeah, it was good again. Great! What's new?"
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Jul 15, 2014 5:54:53 GMT -5
Waid's DD is just so consistently good that there's almost nothing to talk about. "Oh, yeah, it was good again. Great! What's new?" Didn't he just kill Foggy? That makes me very sad. The Marvel Universe is better with Foggy in it than without, as was the case for Echo, Sharon and Peggy Carter, Eric Koenig, Karen Page, Jasper Sitwell, Gabe Jones, Clay Quartermain, Stature and so many other supporting characters or minor heroes. Yeah, I'm sure Waid can write a poignant story about a beloved character's demise. He's a good writer. But do we really need this smorgasborg of death to elicit a strong response in readers? Is there no other good story to tell than the death of Foggy, the death of Archie, the death of Wolverine? I wouldn't mind if time did pass in comics, as it did until the mid 70s or thereabouts. In real life, people die. But in comics time has stood still for deaceds, now, and each new death is made more and more futile and ridiculous by each new resurrection; the fate of characters seems to depend on marketing more than on the unpredictable nature of life. I probably shouldn't care; it's clear that the Big Two, when they don't simply use their comics as ancillary products to their movies (where the real money is), act as if their current readership was around for little more than two-three years or so. It's the long-time readers who are the anomaly in this field, not the use of old characters as disposable commodities.
|
|
|
Post by Spike-X on Jul 15, 2014 6:43:22 GMT -5
Waid's DD is just so consistently good that there's almost nothing to talk about. "Oh, yeah, it was good again. Great! What's new?" Didn't he just kill Foggy? Did he? Or did you maybe, just possibly, perhaps not read the issue?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2014 7:03:04 GMT -5
You should probably read the comic before you lament the death of creativity in the industry
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Jul 15, 2014 8:04:44 GMT -5
Didn't he just kill Foggy? Did he? Or did you maybe, just possibly, perhaps not read the issue? If I had read the issue I wouldn't ask the question, would I? I hope he didn't, especially since his run has been praised as bringing the fun back to the title. If he did kill Foggy, I'm sure it was a poignant story because Waid is a good writer (as I said earlier). I would still think it a bad idea, though, as we've seen too much of that kind of things recently. Your reply gives me hope, though. This might be another fake Foggy's death, similar to the one at the start of Brubaker's run. I'm keeping my fingers crossed (and will take a look at what review sites say!)
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2014 8:20:09 GMT -5
Waid's DD is just so consistently good that there's almost nothing to talk about. "Oh, yeah, it was good again. Great! What's new?" Didn't he just kill Foggy? That makes me very sad. The Marvel Universe is better with Foggy in it than without, as was the case for Echo, Sharon and Peggy Carter, Eric Koenig, Karen Page, Jasper Sitwell, Gabe Jones, Clay Quartermain, Stature and so many other supporting characters or minor heroes. Yeah, I'm sure Waid can write a poignant story about a beloved character's demise. He's a good writer. But do we really need this smorgasborg of death to elicit a strong response in readers? Is there no other good story to tell than the death of Foggy, the death of Archie, the death of Wolverine? I wouldn't mind if time did pass in comics, as it did until the mid 70s or thereabouts. In real life, people die. But in comics time has stood still for deaceds, now, and each new death is made more and more futile and ridiculous by each new resurrection; the fate of characters seems to depend on marketing more than on the unpredictable nature of life. I probably shouldn't care; it's clear that the Big Two, when they don't simply use their comics as ancillary products to their movies (where the real money is), act as if their current readership was around for little more than two-three years or so. It's the long-time readers who are the anomaly in this field, not the use of old characters as disposable commodities. I think it's a common thing for comic fans to blame a story for what will eventually happen or what it will eventually mean instead of on it's own merits. Just because a death will be overturned doesn't make the story where it happens any less worth telling. It's because death is such a big part of life that the story of a beloved comic character dying can be so poignant. It's one of the only mediums where death can be explored the way it is. Comic deaths have given us some of the best stories in comic history. Ferro-Lad, the death of Superman, Supergirl and Flash in Crisis, Gwen Stacy, Captain Stacy, Superior Spider-Man, the death of Captain America, Ultimate Peter Parker. The issue following the death of Johnny Storm was some of the best emotional storytelling comics has ever done, all mostly without words
|
|
|
Post by Ish Kabbible on Jul 15, 2014 8:32:46 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by travishedgecoke on Jul 15, 2014 8:45:31 GMT -5
That makes me very sad. The Marvel Universe is better with Foggy in it than without, as was the case for Echo, Sharon and Peggy Carter, Eric Koenig, Karen Page, Jasper Sitwell, Gabe Jones, Clay Quartermain, Stature and so many other supporting characters or minor heroes. Peggy not being dead would require a lot, wouldn't it? Sharon was dead for ages. Mark Waid brought her back, with Ron Garney, and I seriously doubt anyone was clamoring for it, or even expecting it. That she's been such a major part of Cap ever since is down to them, not really about the very different character she was before who died and stayed dead for decades. Yeah, I'm sure Waid can write a poignant story about a beloved character's demise. He's a good writer. But do we really need this smorgasborg of death to elicit a strong response in readers? Is there no other good story to tell than the death of Foggy, the death of Archie, the death of Wolverine? Those aren't even remotely the only stories being told with those characters even this year. There are literally, other Foggy, Archie Andrews, and Wolverine stories happening this year. So, clearly there's not "no other good story to tell." They're actively telling other stories, good or not. I wouldn't mind if time did pass in comics, as it did until the mid 70s or thereabouts. In real life, people die. But in comics time has stood still for deaceds, now, and each new death is made more and more futile and ridiculous by each new resurrection; the fate of characters seems to depend on marketing more than on the unpredictable nature of life. I don't think they are. My brother has been in serious, long comas more than once now. Just in the last few months, I've got "he's dead" messages more than three times, that turned out to be immature. Just because he was practically inert, but then, five months or a year later, awake and speaking doesn't make me roll my eyes and go "well, if he comes back, why'd I even miss him? And, I feel the same with fictional deaths of serial characters. Being gone, even being "temporarily dead" can still have gravitas, distinct from the notion they're never ever ever coming back. Particularly in terms of DC or Marvel, it's not a question of will they, but when and how, it's an issue of what everyone does while they're gone. It's not like, just because Peter Parker can make a deal with Mephisto to resurrect Foggy so they can play Call of Duty together, suddenly Foggy being shot in the face or car-bombed didn't hurt Foggy a lot, or that his stuff might have all been willed away and his lease canceled before he's resurrected. Losing your apartment because you were dead has its own narrative hooks, its own emotional hooks. In fiction, especially, death is not the end of your worries as a character, it's just something you're going to have to deal with, and while you're out of the picture, everyone else has to deal. [/quote]
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2014 8:54:44 GMT -5
In a related note, it's funny how fans are complaining because Wolverine is going to die, and therefore won't be in every comic Marvel publishes
|
|
|
Post by comicscube on Jul 15, 2014 8:59:43 GMT -5
If a character's death results in a good story, the good story is not undone when the character comes back to life. Funeral for a Friend is a great series of comics; they're still great even though Superman came back to life half a year later. I was reading the original Return of Barry Allen. It's a good comic that still holds up, and isn't undone because Barry Allen was actually brought back 20 years later.
|
|
|
Post by comicscube on Jul 15, 2014 9:04:03 GMT -5
products to their movies (where the real money is), act as if their current readership was around for little more than two-three years or so. It's the long-time readers who are the anomaly in this field, not the use of old characters as disposable commodities. This is historically true, and I would argue that it's when they started catering to longtime readers that comics started becoming a niche medium. Carl Barks recycled punchlines within 10 years of each other, figuring that that was a reader's life cycle, and we're talking about Carl Barks, who had uberdevoted fans. At the very least, there's a correlation. Which way it goes, I can't claim to know, but it's probably a cycle.
|
|