|
|
Post by fanboystranger on Sept 22, 2015 14:14:26 GMT -5
Can't remember the issue number, but I wrote to Marvel about it (in pen, on a torn out piece of notebook paper) and they printed it! (editing the hell out of it, and adding a suicide prevention hotline number). but it was a rare Peter David misfire for me. . an issue of Hulk where a character finds out he is HIV Positive, and his solution was to park his car on the train tracks and commit suicide. it made me absolutely furious, and I have not re-read the issue since that 1 time. edit: it appears it is this one, and it doesn't surprise me (at all) that the morons at Wizard voted it one of the "best single issues since you were born".  Yeah, this issue was a real headscratcher for me, too. Unlike most of these books mentioned, this was not some half-assed cash-in of something more popular or a fill-in/inventory issue-- this was a top creative team in Peter David and Gary Frank that had been on a fantastic run since Frank came on the book. The story itself is not only offensive in its treatment of Jim Wilson, but also in everything it gets wrong about HIV, even within the context of the time when it was published. Looking at it today, it's amazing that it was even published in the first place, let alone heralded at the time as an "important" issue. It's a blight on an otherwise excellent year of comics that would culminate with the final fall of The Pantheon in issue 425. |
|
|
|
Post by Phil Maurice on Sept 22, 2015 15:29:55 GMT -5
One that sticks out in my mind (and many others, Google tells me) is Bloodstrike #5 (1993). Where a Frank Miller or an Alan Moore can sometimes use ultra-violence to provoke, to shock, or to examine cultural and political traditions, Bloodstrike #5 is a kid poking a dead animal with a stick to expose the guts. It's just gross.
(Dis)Honorable mention: Avengers #200. Also gross. |
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on Sept 22, 2015 19:18:55 GMT -5
To clarify first, the soap opera elements I dislike are situations where you have a hero and a normal spouse or girlfriend/boyfriend that's in on it but is otherwise a civilian. It just doesn't work for me. I'm fine if said significant other is a hero, secret agent, or even super scientist. I'm not against romance or angst, I just don't like the set-up we had when Mary Jane and Peter were married. Also, I was specifically talking about superheroes who reveal their identities. I in no way advocate celibacy for police officers. If I wanted to live in a society filled with sexually repressed public officials, I'd time travel back to the days of the Inquisition. But Peter didn't reveal his identity. Not until Civil War, and the consequences of that, basically, were exactly what you're suggesting would happen. Which in itself led to the marriage being erased. I meant that he revealed it to Mary Jane herself...or rather she found out. This is opposed to Lois not knowing Clark is Superman (though I'm not sure they were ever that close before marriage) or Bernie not knowing Steve Rogers is Cap. Situations like that. Regardless, I think most here probably agree that One More Day and Civil War tainted the character and caused many more problems than it solved. This is why I'm a big fan of Frank Miller's philosophy that fans are perfectly justified in having their own personal continuities. My personal Marvel continuity basically ends around 1993 + the Heroes Return stuff of 1998-2001 (basically the pre-Quesada Marvel comeback years). |
|
|
|
Post by Action Ace on Sept 22, 2015 19:28:34 GMT -5
One that leaps to mind for me is Avengers #178, "The Martyr Perplex". Some raggedy weirdo shows up to the Beast informing him that "there's something in you that needs killing" along with some other psychobabble BS that for some reason affects the Beast. He spends the rest of the issue in naval-gazing until the raggedy guy shows up to someone else with the same dumb proclamation. On top of that was art (breakdowns at least) from Carmine Infantino that was far, far from his best efforts. Utterly stupid crap. The worst issue of Avengers from #1-300, hands down. There is a little known clause in collecting circles that allows you to declare a classic run of Avengers as complete even if issue #178 is missing. |
|
|
|
Post by Action Ace on Sept 22, 2015 19:29:25 GMT -5
The final part of the One More Day fiasco in Amazing Spider-Man (Vol. 2) #545 must be at the top of my personal comics hatelist. Just an utterly terrible conclusion to a terrible storyline that did irreversible damage to a beloved fictional character of mine. The stench of what happened in that issue is still clinging to the Spider-Man comics some 7+ years later.  Still don't see the problem. Marrying Spidey was a mistake in the first place, in my opinion. co-signed |
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,202 
|
Post by Confessor on Sept 22, 2015 20:27:29 GMT -5
A close contender is of course the personally upsetting Sins Past.  Why on earth would you put as great a story arc as Sins Past in this thread?  (yep, it's that old disagreement again, my friend)  |
|
|
|
Post by Paradox on Sept 22, 2015 21:08:02 GMT -5
My nominee:  Complete ineptness on all levels. EDIT: Heh, I hadn't noticed this was a pic of a very ragged copy, but when I went to change it, I decided this fit the mood better.  |
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on Sept 22, 2015 21:15:15 GMT -5
I've never even heard of that. Worse than Mighty Crusaders?
|
|
|
|
Post by tingramretro on Sept 23, 2015 1:24:46 GMT -5
But Peter didn't reveal his identity. Not until Civil War, and the consequences of that, basically, were exactly what you're suggesting would happen. Which in itself led to the marriage being erased. I meant that he revealed it to Mary Jane herself...or rather she found out. This is opposed to Lois not knowing Clark is Superman (though I'm not sure they were ever that close before marriage) or Bernie not knowing Steve Rogers is Cap. Situations like that. As I recall, Bernie did find out Steve was Cap, during their relationship. And what about people like Elongated Man or Animal Man, who were portrayed for so many years as happily married that it's pretty much an essential part of their characters? |
|
|
|
Post by tingramretro on Sept 23, 2015 1:25:33 GMT -5
I've never even heard of that. Worse than Mighty Crusaders? Very few things are worse than the Mighty Crusaders. |
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Sept 23, 2015 5:52:46 GMT -5
A close contender is of course the personally upsetting Sins Past. Why on earth would you put as great a story arc as Sins Past in this thread? (yep, it's that old disagreement again, my friend) Why on earth did they have to include that panel of Gwen mid coitus ? |
|
|
|
Post by The Captain on Sept 23, 2015 6:45:03 GMT -5
Why on earth would you put as great a story arc as Sins Past in this thread? (yep, it's that old disagreement again, my friend) Why on earth did they have to include that panel of Gwen mid coitus ? At least that shot of Gwen is better than the one in the lower left corner of Osborn. First off, what the hell is up with his hair? Seriously, does he have cornrows or does he shave his head in lines like that on purpose, or is it just a stylistic thing the artist does even though it has no anatomical basis? Secondly, it appears that Norman has a pretty chill "O Face". It's like, "yeah, I just banged a hot young chick, but I'm too detached to get into it, so I'll just half-smirk bemusedly when I'm done." |
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,202
|
Post by Confessor on Sept 23, 2015 6:59:04 GMT -5
Why on earth would you put as great a story arc as Sins Past in this thread? (yep, it's that old disagreement again, my friend) Why on earth did they have to include that panel of Gwen mid coitus ? Err...why not? It's tastefully done. There's no gratuitous nudity. The whole thing was very tastefully handled, I'd say. Yet another reason why "Sins Past" was such an amazingly good story arc. First off, what the hell is up with his hair? Seriously, does he have cornrows or does he shave his head in lines like that on purpose, or is it just a stylistic thing the artist does even though it has no anatomical basis? It does have a (rare) anatomical basis in real life though. I remember years ago that someone on the Spider-Man forum at CBR posted a photo of a ginger haired guy whose hair was in really tight curls and fairly close cropped, so that it did have those undulating ridges in it, a la Norman and Harry Osborne. Wish I'd saved that pic now, but I didn't. |
|
|
|
Post by MDG on Sept 23, 2015 10:13:11 GMT -5
First off, what the hell is up with his hair? Seriously, does he have cornrows or does he shave his head in lines like that on purpose, or is it just a stylistic thing the artist does even though it has no anatomical basis? Not all of Ditko's stylistic things translated to more "realistic" artists. Hell, Romita gave Peter a brown slab of plastic on his head for years.  |
|
|
|
Post by Paradox on Sept 23, 2015 10:41:21 GMT -5
I've never even heard of that. Worse than Mighty Crusaders? Very few things are worse than the Mighty Crusaders. This is one of them.  You know when you're eight and you try to write your own comic? Like that (although the art is...passable enough). |
|
