|
|
Post by Gene on May 26, 2016 20:01:00 GMT -5
I feel like not enough is being made of the elegant simplicity of Wally Classic's explanation of "Oh yeah, I have a cousin I never told you about and his name is also Wally West and that's who that other guy is."
|
|
|
|
Post by dupersuper on May 26, 2016 20:50:43 GMT -5
I feel like not enough is being made of the elegant simplicity of Wally Classic's explanation of "Oh yeah, I have a cousin I never told you about and his name is also Wally West and that's who that other guy is." That was a nice "eat your cake and have it to" moment. "Relax every one reading about the new guy; he's not going anywhere". |
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on May 26, 2016 21:24:41 GMT -5
The difference is that Moore, while using established characters, created extremely original takes and story-lines that did things we never saw before. Johns is just playing in the story framework of what Moore created. It's like how Marvel can't resist rehashing The Dark Phoenix saga with mediocre variation after variation to the present day. You can't get out of Moore's creative shadow by constantly rehashing his plots and story-lines. If Moore practiced what Johns does, he never would have written Watchmen or even Swamp Thing. Meh. He knew he was adding to the communal toy chest. Chiding some one for using the toys he left seems petty. He didn't leave the toys. They were stolen from him. |
|
|
|
Post by dupersuper on May 26, 2016 21:41:10 GMT -5
Meh. He knew he was adding to the communal toy chest. Chiding some one for using the toys he left seems petty. He didn't leave the toys. They were stolen from him. Watchmen yes, Green Lantern no. |
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on May 27, 2016 2:32:09 GMT -5
The difference is that Moore, while using established characters, created extremely original takes and story-lines that did things we never saw before. Johns is just playing in the story framework of what Moore created. It's like how Marvel can't resist rehashing The Dark Phoenix saga with mediocre variation after variation to the present day. You can't get out of Moore's creative shadow by constantly rehashing his plots and story-lines. If Moore practiced what Johns does, he never would have written Watchmen or even Swamp Thing. Meh. He knew he was adding to the communal toy chest. Chiding some one for using the toys he left seems petty. But what previous story line did Moore mine for any of his DC work? Same with Dark Phoenix. From my perceptive, adding a new character to be used in perpetuity is one thing, but rehashing plots and stories is something else. The problem is that around 1986 everything important seemed to wrap up at Marvel and DC (with some exceptions) and the fans that would later turn pro have been overly obsessed with specific stories and plots ever since. Kirby basically said the same thing about people telling stories with his characters. He preferred seeing creators create new things. No matter how good or bad something like Rebirth is, it seems to me that every time stuff like this is a huge success it's a strike against creativity and innovation. |
|
|
|
Post by Trevor on May 27, 2016 6:25:18 GMT -5
I don't think any entertainment medium would survive if it was always innovation and creativity. There is part of us that wants 'soap opera' and constant retconning.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on May 27, 2016 6:57:25 GMT -5
I don't think any entertainment medium would survive if it was always innovation and creativity. There is part of us that wants 'soap opera' and constant retconning. But this is a post 1986 phenomenon. Somehow, comics thrived for the 50 previous years. I've long since lost interest in DC's "Crisis" nonsense. I like the first one well enough, and loved the Perez art, but I can see now that it caused far more problems than it ever fixed. I now believe that the worst thing to ever happen to Marvel and DC from a creative standpoint is the mega-event, particularly those of the continuity altering variety. This has now officially bypassed Rob Liefeld and glossy paper as my greatest comic industry evil. |
|
|
|
Post by Trevor on May 27, 2016 9:25:55 GMT -5
I don't think any entertainment medium would survive if it was always innovation and creativity. There is part of us that wants 'soap opera' and constant retconning. But this is a post 1986 phenomenon. Somehow, comics thrived for the 50 previous years. I've long since lost interest in DC's "Crisis" nonsense. I like the first one well enough, and loved the Perez art, but I can see now that it caused far more problems than it ever fixed. I now believe that the worst thing to ever happen to Marvel and DC from a creative standpoint is the mega-event, particularly those of the continuity altering variety. This has now officially bypassed Rob Liefeld and glossy paper as my greatest comic industry evil. What do you mean by "this"? My point was that comic readers, mostly, don't want true innovation and creativity. We want the same basic core stuff recycled over and over. The golden and silver age stories are all retreading the same material, really not much different than today. Same with TV and movies. Everything's a sequel or prequel or reboot or reimagining or spoof of stuff that was done decades ago. It's what the mainstream public wants. Truly original stuff never makes it to TV or theaters or mainstream comics. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 27, 2016 10:32:32 GMT -5
But this is a post 1986 phenomenon. Somehow, comics thrived for the 50 previous years. I've long since lost interest in DC's "Crisis" nonsense. I like the first one well enough, and loved the Perez art, but I can see now that it caused far more problems than it ever fixed. I now believe that the worst thing to ever happen to Marvel and DC from a creative standpoint is the mega-event, particularly those of the continuity altering variety. This has now officially bypassed Rob Liefeld and glossy paper as my greatest comic industry evil. What do you mean by "this"? My point was that comic readers, mostly, don't want true innovation and creativity. We want the same basic core stuff recycled over and over. The golden and silver age stories are all retreading the same material, really not much different than today. Same with TV and movies. Everything's a sequel or prequel or reboot or reimagining or spoof of stuff that was done decades ago. It's what the mainstream public wants. Truly original stuff never makes it to TV or theaters or mainstream comics. The core comics audience wants this-you mean the one that barely buys 50K copies of most "successful" books when before we got this constant regurgitation of stuff like you highlight they used to sell hundreds of thousands of copies of the poorer selling books (like say Jimmy Olsen selling 250K copies a month but being on the chopping block when Kirby took over to a wider audience who enjoyed fresher material? That core comic book audience? The one that is dying off and not bringing in the next generation of readers to perpetuate itself? That core comic book audience? Catering to them is what has caused the massive exodus of readers from the readership of comics. -M |
|
|
|
Post by Trevor on May 27, 2016 11:19:11 GMT -5
I don't think the quality of comics has anything to do with the dip in sales. Comics get better each decade.
A big part of it is economics, paper costs and creator pay went up, and a kid can no longer buy 25 comics with their weekly allowance.
But I think it's mainly the immense increase in entertainment choices. When I was a kid you had comic books and three TV stations. Just the Internet alone makes those former choices paltry in comparison, let alone adding in video games and TV/movie expansion.
|
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Gordon Scratch on May 27, 2016 12:04:09 GMT -5
I don't think the quality of comics has anything to do with the dip in sales. Comics get better each decade. A big part of it is economics, paper costs and creator pay went up, and a kid can no longer buy 25 comics with their weekly allowance. But I think it's mainly the immense increase in entertainment choices. When I was a kid you had comic books and three TV stations. Just the Internet alone makes those former choices paltry in comparison, let alone adding in video games and TV/movie expansion. While I agree with all that, I strongly disagree with your previous statement about what (to quote you) comic book readers want. This new development for cap is the first one that caught my attention in years, merely because it seems to put the character somewhere he's never been before, which makes it interesting to check how the creators will manage that new paradigm. I and most of my comic book reader friends have almost given up on Marvel and DC mainstream comics because of that very same thing you say we crave. Grant Morrison's X-Men and Bru's Cap probably were the last two mainstream comics of significant impact on their respective universes that I cared enough about to actually talk about those outside of comic book circles. What made Alan Moore and Frank Miller's mainstream stories successfull is those going the exact opposite way from what you said we claim, this is still the case today why I liked those two highly successfull storylines I cited above. And maybe this new Cap one could be of the same mold, only time will tell. |
|
|
|
Post by Trevor on May 27, 2016 12:14:09 GMT -5
I don't think the quality of comics has anything to do with the dip in sales. Comics get better each decade. A big part of it is economics, paper costs and creator pay went up, and a kid can no longer buy 25 comics with their weekly allowance. But I think it's mainly the immense increase in entertainment choices. When I was a kid you had comic books and three TV stations. Just the Internet alone makes those former choices paltry in comparison, let alone adding in video games and TV/movie expansion. While I agree with all that, I strongly disagree with your previous statement about what (to quote you) comic book readers want. This new development for cap is the first one that caught my attention in years, merely because it seems to put the character somewhere he's never been before, which makes it interesting to check how the creators will manage that new paradigm. I and most of my comic book reader friends have almost given up on Marvel and DC mainstream comics because of that very same thing you say we crave. Grant Morrison's X-Men and Bru's Cap probably were the last two mainstream comics of significant impact on their respective universes that I cared enough about to actually talk about those outside of comic book circles. What made Alan Moore and Frank Miller's mainstream stories successfull is those going the exact opposite way from what you said we claim, this is still the case today why I liked those two highly successfull storylines I cited above. And maybe this new Cap one could be of the same mold, only time will tell. But a handful of series doesn't make an industry. And when I say 'we' I don't necessarily mean me or you or anyone in this thread. Comics haven't really changed for the most part, and have survived for 80 years, probably because the basic formula works. |
|
|
|
Post by tingramretro on May 27, 2016 12:19:10 GMT -5
Comics have been around for a lot longer than 80 years.
|
|
|
|
Post by Trevor on May 27, 2016 12:28:11 GMT -5
Comics have been around for a lot longer than 80 years. Maybe I'm wrong, but I thought besides a few outliers comics started in America in 1933 or so. Educate me. |
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Gordon Scratch on May 27, 2016 12:29:03 GMT -5
Comics have been around for a lot longer than 80 years. Indeed, and as the economics of the current industry and Trevor indicate, it is now surviving, not thriving as it used to, which IMHO is a sign that the old formula still all too present doesn't work as much as you think  |
|
