|
Post by Icctrombone on Dec 2, 2023 7:18:05 GMT -5
DC really didn't need a Punisher, when they had a Batman. Everyone else got grittied up; but, Marvel kind of lacked that same level of character, for a long time. Miller turned Daredevil into that; but not in the same way. He was less a figure of terror, than he was a nuisance that plagued the Kingpin. DC reacted more in some of their superhero characters, making them grimmer and grittier, following on the success of Dark Knight and Watchmen and the Punisher and Wolverine had also benefitted from that same tonality. Mike Grell was courted back to DC and turned Green Arrow from a gimmick archer into an urban hunter, with street crime as his prey. The Question was more of a cult title, but he was also an urban vigilante, using martial arts. Suicide Squad featured super criminals used as expendable weapons on secret battlefronts. Lots of superheroes took on darker tones and costuming. DC's strength wasn't in copying The punisher, who was a copy of Mack Bolan; but, in making their already urban heroes into darker versions, or emphasizing that darkness, like with Batman. I just want to add that even today's Punisher is no longer the Punisher. The "gritty" version of the Max line is (spoiler!!!) dead. A character like him in the Marvel universe is a bit out of place. Lately they had him go hunting for classic super-villains but it seemed a bit of a joke, because we know very well that they can't stay dead, so it all seemed a bit pointless. I think that after decades this character has nothing left to say. I wonder if ANY of the comic characters have anything to say after 50 plus years.
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Dec 2, 2023 8:53:01 GMT -5
I just want to add that even today's Punisher is no longer the Punisher. The "gritty" version of the Max line is (spoiler!!!) dead. A character like him in the Marvel universe is a bit out of place. Lately they had him go hunting for classic super-villains but it seemed a bit of a joke, because we know very well that they can't stay dead, so it all seemed a bit pointless. I think that after decades this character has nothing left to say. I wonder if ANY of the comic characters have anything to say after 50 plus years. Well I think it depends on the character right? This, for example, is the best-selling comic in Italy and is 75 years old. ![](https://i.ibb.co/djGsyXH/9788869615832-0-536-0-75.jpg) Then there are characters who are born with a very short expiration date... ![](https://i.ibb.co/qsK0NWP/adamxtreme.jpg)
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,639
|
Post by shaxper on Dec 5, 2023 20:27:12 GMT -5
Maybe not a particularly quick question, but one that doesn't need its own review thread, at least.
Sometime between Fantastic Four #229 and #230, a public announcement was made about Doug Moench leaving Fantastic Four and John Byrne replacing him. The letters page for #229 is still asking readers what they think of Moench's run, whereas #230 acknowledges the creative changes as if they were already well known, and #231 already has fans writing in about the creative changes (Byrne won't actually start until #232).
So, my two-part question:
1. Anyone know where this announcement was made? 2. Does the announcement indicate (or does anyone know) why Moench left the title? Was it low sales, Moench's request, an attempt to prevent Byrne from leaving Marvel, etc?
|
|
|
Post by commond on Dec 5, 2023 21:15:11 GMT -5
Moench didn’t get along with Salicrup or Shooter, which may have had something to do with him leaving the book. Originally, Shooter was planning to write it, but the Moench and Sienkiewicz fill-in issues were well received and they became the new creative team.
When Byrne signed on to write the series, the initial plan was for Sienkiewicz and Sinnott to continue as the artists. Byrne was supposed to continue plotting and penciling the X-Men while writing the Fantastic Four. After Byrne quit X-Men, he was left without a penciling assignment and Shooter figured he might as just draw the FF himself and let Sienkiewicz focus on Moon Knight. The inker was supposed to be Terry Austin, but that changed at the last moment and Byrne wound up inking himself.
|
|
|
Post by jason on Dec 5, 2023 23:48:07 GMT -5
So how, if at all, does Kryptonite affect Bizzaro? Does it still weaken him or does it make him stronger?
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Dec 5, 2023 23:52:04 GMT -5
So how, if at all, does Kryptonite affect Bizzaro? Does it still weaken him or does it make him stronger? Blue kryptonite (opposite of green kryptonite) made Bizarros highly intelligent. Green K had no effect on them because they were not from Krypton.
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Dec 6, 2023 12:21:36 GMT -5
Originally, Shooter was planning to write it, but the Moench and Sienkiewicz fill-in issues were well received and they became the new creative team. Uh, I didn't know that! I remember their stories and, well, "didn't like them" is an euphemism.
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Dec 6, 2023 12:24:08 GMT -5
So how, if at all, does Kryptonite affect Bizzaro? Does it still weaken him or does it make him stronger? Blue kryptonite (opposite of green kryptonite) made Bizarros highly intelligent. Green K had no effect on them because they were not from Krypton. In the pre-Crisis era blue K. would be fatal for him ![](https://i.ibb.co/b6WrHLh/sup-423-002.png)
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2023 12:54:21 GMT -5
Cue the classic Kryptonite chart! "Gold K" haunted me as a kid when I learned about it, I was really worried for Supes ![](https://i.imgur.com/xB0G5Eo.jpg)
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on Dec 8, 2023 12:05:15 GMT -5
After Byrne quit X-Men, he was left without a penciling assignment Thanks to that, we had in FF his best work ever. Quite a difference, going from 60 pages to 20 pages a month.
|
|
|
Post by Farrar on Dec 9, 2023 16:53:27 GMT -5
Maybe not a particularly quick question, but one that doesn't need its own review thread, at least. Sometime between Fantastic Four #229 and #230, a public announcement was made about Doug Moench leaving Fantastic Four and John Byrne replacing him. The letters page for #229 is still asking readers what they think of Moench's run, whereas #230 acknowledges the creative changes as if they were already well known, and #231 already has fans writing in about the creative changes (Byrne won't actually start until #232). So, my two-part question: 1. Anyone know where this announcement was made? 2. Does the announcement indicate (or does anyone know) why Moench left the title? Was it low sales, Moench's request, an attempt to prevent Byrne from leaving Marvel, etc? I don't know if this helps, but I thought I'd toss this out here anyway: In X-Men #143's letter column Claremont announces Byrne's departure from X-Men; he states that this news has been "widely reported in the various comics news-magazines." In Marvel Two-In-One #74's letter column there's a reference to "new FANTASTIC FOUR scripter John Byrne." To give this some chronological context, X-Men #143 and MTIO #74 were on sale in Dec. 1980, as was Fantastic Four #228. Release date info courtesy of (as usual!) by the late great Mike and his truly Amazing site. RIP Mike and our eternal thanks to you. Claremont's announcement (X-Men 143) ![](https://i.imgur.com/cKU4NwC.png)
|
|
|
Post by chadwilliam on Dec 10, 2023 12:22:23 GMT -5
In your opinion, why has DC never managed to have a successful vigilante character a là Punisher? I think Cody's assessment of the situation is the right one - at around the time The Punisher took off, we were already getting a grim and gritty Batman over in his titles. The addition of a Punisher like character elsewhere in the company might have ran the risk of defining DC by their more violent heroes and not a place where wholesome family entertainment was the order of the day with Batman being the exception. I remember Shaxper bringing up DC's Impact! line which began in 1991 and drawing parallels with this attempt to simply tell fun stories with the grittier approach Marvel was taking at the same time (ie. McFarlane's Spider-Man series). It really seemed that despite their forays into darker storytelling, DC had a genuine interest in retaining some of the fun and enjoyment which used to go into comic book storytelling. This changed, of course, but by the time that DC had given in and fully embraced the Dark Age of comics, The Punisher model didn't seem as crucial to being successful as it had been just a couple of years prior. I will note that DC did have a successful vigilante killer hero during the 70's and 80's in the form of Jonah Hex.
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Dec 10, 2023 13:05:04 GMT -5
In your opinion, why has DC never managed to have a successful vigilante character a là Punisher? I think Cody's assessment of the situation is the right one - at around the time The Punisher took off, we were already getting a grim and gritty Batman over in his titles. The addition of a Punisher like character elsewhere in the company might have ran the risk of defining DC by their more violent heroes and not a place where wholesome family entertainment was the order of the day with Batman being the exception. I remember Shaxper bringing up DC's Impact! line which began in 1991 and drawing parallels with this attempt to simply tell fun stories with the grittier approach Marvel was taking at the same time (ie. McFarlane's Spider-Man series). It really seemed that despite their forays into darker storytelling, DC had a genuine interest in retaining some of the fun and enjoyment which used to go into comic book storytelling. This changed, of course, but by the time that DC had given in and fully embraced the Dark Age of comics, The Punisher model didn't seem as crucial to being successful as it had been just a couple of years prior. I will note that DC did have a successful vigilante killer hero during the 70's and 80's in the form of Jonah Hex. The Vigilante character that spun off from the NTT lasted 50 issues.
|
|
|
Post by foxley on Dec 10, 2023 15:16:23 GMT -5
I think Cody's assessment of the situation is the right one - at around the time The Punisher took off, we were already getting a grim and gritty Batman over in his titles. The addition of a Punisher like character elsewhere in the company might have ran the risk of defining DC by their more violent heroes and not a place where wholesome family entertainment was the order of the day with Batman being the exception. I remember Shaxper bringing up DC's Impact! line which began in 1991 and drawing parallels with this attempt to simply tell fun stories with the grittier approach Marvel was taking at the same time (ie. McFarlane's Spider-Man series). It really seemed that despite their forays into darker storytelling, DC had a genuine interest in retaining some of the fun and enjoyment which used to go into comic book storytelling. This changed, of course, but by the time that DC had given in and fully embraced the Dark Age of comics, The Punisher model didn't seem as crucial to being successful as it had been just a couple of years prior. I will note that DC did have a successful vigilante killer hero during the 70's and 80's in the form of Jonah Hex. The Vigilante character that spun off from the NTT lasted 50 issues. But the Vigilante was a lot more morally tormented by his actions than the Punisher ever was, and the series ended with him committing suicide.
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Dec 10, 2023 16:36:31 GMT -5
The Vigilante character that spun off from the NTT lasted 50 issues. But the Vigilante was a lot more morally tormented by his actions than the Punisher ever was, and the series ended with him committing suicide. And there more than a Vigilante in the comics, right?
|
|