|
Post by brutalis on Apr 29, 2019 8:48:02 GMT -5
Lots of 1970's comic books were real head trips and are they are even more trippy when you role em up and smoke em! There. I said it.
|
|
|
Post by impulse on Apr 29, 2019 9:10:03 GMT -5
Deadpool is a TERRIBLE character and has never been funny. That's probably the closest I get to a "THERE I SAID IT" opinion. At least when it involves comics... Not even the Kelly stuff? This issue especially will always be one of my favourites. Gail Simone's run was great, too, though the guy has been majorly overused to be sure.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2019 12:07:33 GMT -5
I quite like Deadpool, but it's the whole overexposure thing.
Here in Britain, Panini has the licence to reprint Marvel comics on a monthly basis (they do trades, too). Right now, Deadpool has his own reprint title, occupies one third of a Wolverine reprint title - and the Spider-Man/Deadpool comic occupies one-third of the UK Spidey title. So he's everywhere, it seems.
Less is more for me. Maybe. I have some thoughts on that. Which I may as well share right now.
Less is more. I think. I don't feel a character needs 4-5 books a month because a) it is not needed creatively, and b) we don't possess bottomless wallets.
However, it didn't seem a problem years ago. As a kid, Superman was in Action Comics, Superman, DC Comics Presents, and Justice League of America. I never felt Supes was over-exposed.
But as I got older and more cynical, well it felt too much. The 90s had a Superman book on the shelf every week.
Looking back, I think the difference as a kid was that each Superman book was mainly standalone. I could buy DC Comics Presents one month, Action Comics the next, etc. Rarely any overlap. But in my teenage years, during the "Triangle Era", if you really wanted to keep up to date with the Man of Steel's exploits, you had to buy most or all of the titles.
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Apr 30, 2019 0:25:11 GMT -5
Deadpool was decent back in the day under Kelly (though I did sell those comics I had for other stuff)... but since he's become Bugs Bunny with weapons I can't stomach him at all.
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Apr 30, 2019 6:00:04 GMT -5
@taxidriver1980 says
Of the 4 books mentioned two of them had co stars and was a " different" look as far as stories go.
The triangle years was quite amazing but it makes for more work when you want to read a story and have to search through 4 separate boxes to do it. I think most of the triangle years he wasn't in the JLA books anymore.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2019 7:13:00 GMT -5
Yes, the likes of DC Comics Presents had a very different "flavour". So, as a kid, for me, it was only really Action Comics and Superman. Then they added The Adventures of Superman, post-Byrne. Then came Superman: The Man of Steel. I carried on reading comics into my teens (I've never stopped), but although Superman is my favourite superhero, I could not muster up the enthusiasm for Superman: The Man of Tomorrow even though it was a "skip week" book.
The "Triangle Era" was a bit unwieldy for me, if I'm honest.
One book I collected religiously in my teens was The Incredible Hulk. He had one book. True, if Marvel could have found a way to give him 4-5 books, they would have done, but he never felt over-exposed to me.
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Apr 30, 2019 8:30:07 GMT -5
Yes, the likes of DC Comics Presents had a very different "flavour". So, as a kid, for me, it was only really Action Comics and Superman. Then they added The Adventures of Superman, post-Byrne. Then came Superman: The Man of Steel. I carried on reading comics into my teens (I've never stopped), but although Superman is my favourite superhero, I could not muster up the enthusiasm for Superman: The Man of Tomorrow even though it was a "skip week" book. You should have been around in the Silver Age, when you'd see Superman in an average of six titles a month (more when an annual appeared): Superman, Action, World's Finest, Lois Lane, Jimmy Olsen, Superboy, Adventure, and -- increasingly more often -- JLA. Each essentially had its own continuity, which made things easier; only Action, and occasionally Adventure or World's Finest, ever had a continued story.
|
|
|
Post by MDG on Apr 30, 2019 8:43:00 GMT -5
The "Triangle Era" was a bit unwieldy for me, if I'm honest. Yeah, I ducked out around that time. It made it feel like you were being forced to buy everything, whether you wanted to or not. You should have been around in the Silver Age, when you'd see Superman in an average of six titles a month (more when an annual appeared): Superman, Action, World's Finest, Lois Lane, Jimmy Olsen, Superboy, Adventure, and -- increasingly more often -- JLA. Each essentially had its own continuity, which made things easier; only Action, and occasionally Adventure or World's Finest, ever had a continued story. In all, though, there was a pretty consistent tone (excepting JLA and maybe WF). I was probably reading comics for at least a year before I realized that Action and Superman were different series (same with Batman and Detective).
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2019 8:44:24 GMT -5
When did the triangles disappear? I'm gonna guess between 2000-2002...
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Apr 30, 2019 9:00:21 GMT -5
You should have been around in the Silver Age, when you'd see Superman in an average of six titles a month (more when an annual appeared): Superman, Action, World's Finest, Lois Lane, Jimmy Olsen, Superboy, Adventure, and -- increasingly more often -- JLA. Each essentially had its own continuity, which made things easier; only Action, and occasionally Adventure or World's Finest, ever had a continued story. In all, though, there was a pretty consistent tone (excepting JLA and maybe WF). I was probably reading comics for at least a year before I realized that Action and Superman were different series (same with Batman and Detective). Oh, yes. It was the same Superman, for sure. It's just that rarely was there even a mention in one title of what had happened in another.
|
|
|
Post by adamwarlock2099 on Apr 30, 2019 9:13:00 GMT -5
Not even the Kelly stuff? This issue especially will always be one of my favourites. Gail Simone's run was great, too, though the guy has been majorly overused to be sure. Deadpool was decent back in the day under Kelly (though I did sell those comics I had for other stuff)... but since he's become Bugs Bunny with weapons I can't stomach him at all. I can agree with this as well. Waid did a real good mini series before Deadpool's first on going. And Kelly and Simone did good with him in Deadpool/Agent X. After that he turned into a parody of himself. Which is weird as he's a parody already. But if the Deadpool game and his depiction in Ultimate Spiderman are any indication of his character now, no thanks. I could barely sit through ten minutes of the Deadpool movie. And I also didn't mind Deadpool's appearances before he really became a comedy character was he was more a mercenary in appearances in X-Force and other X-titles. I think that plays well to the less is better aspect. There's plenty of generic mercenaries in comic books. Deadpool at that time was not generic to me.
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Apr 30, 2019 10:53:14 GMT -5
The "Triangle Era" was a bit unwieldy for me, if I'm honest. Yeah, I ducked out around that time. It made it feel like you were being forced to buy everything, whether you wanted to or not. You should have been around in the Silver Age, when you'd see Superman in an average of six titles a month (more when an annual appeared): Superman, Action, World's Finest, Lois Lane, Jimmy Olsen, Superboy, Adventure, and -- increasingly more often -- JLA. Each essentially had its own continuity, which made things easier; only Action, and occasionally Adventure or World's Finest, ever had a continued story. In all, though, there was a pretty consistent tone (excepting JLA and maybe WF). I was probably reading comics for at least a year before I realized that Action and Superman were different series (same with Batman and Detective). Triangle Era had some really good, epic stories, for a couple of years, then it became more spotty and unwieldy. I actually bailed right after Panic in the Sky; but, did pick up the whole Doomsday thing, after it got going (had to hunt down first couple of installments). I wished I had skipped the whole thing, by the time they "killed" him.
|
|
|
Post by Graphic Autist on May 3, 2019 11:45:19 GMT -5
I don't care what the circumstances are; Batman would never be able to beat Superman.
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on May 3, 2019 12:55:49 GMT -5
I don't care what the circumstances are; Batman would never be able to beat Superman. I think Superman always lets Bats win 'cause he doesn't want to damage his fragile self-esteem.
|
|
|
Post by Duragizer on May 3, 2019 15:24:14 GMT -5
I don't care what the circumstances are; Batman would never be able to beat Superman. A judo flip certainly wouldn't do the trick (Yeah, I'm talking to you, Alan Burnett & Paul Dini.).
|
|