|
Post by spoon on Apr 2, 2015 22:34:40 GMT -5
I'm still working my way through Age of Apocalypse, and I thought it was only fair to make a comment because its getting better. A little. I read Generation Next (I think it's #1) last night and I now have figured out a story that I can actually follow. Also, the art is much much better than anything I've seen so far. I read the whole issue without checking ahead to see how many pages until the issue was over! I like Husk. I've heard of her (I think she's the one that had sex with Angel in the air in plain sight of her parents) but this is the first time I've seen her in a comic. I'm not so keen on Mondo. But I like Know-It-All. It took me a minute to realize that that's her codename and not just a nickname. It was nice to see Colossus and Kitty again. I don't think I've enjoyed a comic with them since ... 1985? Maybe longer. (Except I really hate Kitty's costume.) But I really hate Chamber! Gah! He's terrible! He's got an accent that I'm guessing is Cockney, and the writer lays it on real thick! (He should have an accent contest with Gambit! No! I take that back!) This is not how you write an accent. You suggest the accent with a few carefully picked words and let the reader fill it in. There's a vast difference in quality between different Age of Apocalypse series. I consider Astonishing X-Men and Generation Next to be the cream of the crop. Beyond that, there's a significant drop-off. AOA actually interrupted Generation X when the series had barely started. I think it was up to #3 or #4 when it was interrupted by that event. Generation X (and its AOA counterpart Generation Next) started off really strong but then faded in quality. I'd recommend the first 10 issues or so.
|
|
|
Post by Pharozonk on Apr 3, 2015 0:23:36 GMT -5
I actually consider the era of X-Books that Age of Apocalypse popped up in to be the worst era of 90's X-Men comics. Along with the Onslaught saga, that era of X-Books was just awful.
1990-1994 = great 1994-1997 = crap 1997/98-2000 = okay/great at times
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,085
|
Post by Confessor on Apr 3, 2015 5:17:33 GMT -5
I'm mostly reading vintage Star Wars comics for my review thread currently. Not that I have any problem with that at all, but it does mean that what with those and catching up on new comics that I don't really have time for anything else currently.
|
|
|
Post by adamwarlock2099 on Apr 3, 2015 9:34:03 GMT -5
In regards to AoA Gambit, like Wolverine, Cyclops and Jean were about the same damn thing as their 616 counterparts. So while I have nothing against the characters in themselves, save Cyclops is a dick, it was frustrating to see no effort given into changing them anybody the boring ass love triangle. The same goes with Gambit with Rogue. I don't mind either character but that lovesick is boring. If you have it in the collection, X-Men Chronicles #1 & 2 both contain back stories that happened before our introduction to AoA in X-Men Alpha #1. The first one is about Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch and also introduces Apocalypse's Four Horsemen. The second one is some reading on Rogue and Magneto getting together and how Gambit had a falling out between him and Magneto (as you probably got an indication of if your read X-ternals) though Gambit still loves Rogue.
But yeah if you don't like 616 Gambit, AoA Gambit isn't going to wow you either. I guess they didn't want to work on character difference too much for those that were at the height of their popularity then.
|
|
|
Post by adamwarlock2099 on Apr 3, 2015 9:46:55 GMT -5
"90s good" seems to me a bogus concept to begin with as there were some outstanding books produced in the '90s, from Shade, the Changing Man to Enigma to Preacher to Quantum and Woody to Hellboy to Starman and on and on. I know I may get banned for this ;-) but I think a lot of the hate from the 90s is feeling we got burned. Which I guess is a valid reason. Did I get some crap books? Yes. Did I get some totally bada$$ books? Yes. Did I get innovative stuff? Yes. I don't regret the 90s. And like other posters who started in other decades, their respective nostalgia may cloud being unbiased. Have I discovered better comics in earlier and latter decades from the 90s? Yes. Just like I've found crap in other decades too. In our hobby I just think it's one of those things trotted out so often that whether some of the points are valid or not it's still a knee jerk reaction when the subject comes up. I'm not trying to call out posters for what they like, just saying that it's such an "established" judgement that maybe some readers can't be objective of a 90s comic with that in the back of their head. That's no offense to anyone that doesn't like 90s comics. I can't read anything older than late 60s cause it all seems silly and ridiculous, and I can't get past that to be objective with the story. Especially Batman, with the way I read him in the 90s and by watching Burton's Batman and Batman:TAS.
|
|
|
Post by fanboystranger on Apr 3, 2015 10:51:34 GMT -5
"90s good" seems to me a bogus concept to begin with as there were some outstanding books produced in the '90s, from Shade, the Changing Man to Enigma to Preacher to Quantum and Woody to Hellboy to Starman and on and on. I know I may get banned for this ;-) but I think a lot of the hate from the 90s is feeling we got burned. Which I guess is a valid reason. Did I get some crap books? Yes. Did I get some totally bada$$ books? Yes. Did I get innovative stuff? Yes. I don't regret the 90s. And like other posters who started in other decades, their respective nostalgia may cloud being unbiased. Have I discovered better comics in earlier and latter decades from the 90s? Yes. Just like I've found crap in other decades too. In our hobby I just think it's one of those things trotted out so often that whether some of the points are valid or not it's still a knee jerk reaction when the subject comes up. I'm not trying to call out posters for what they like, just saying that it's such an "established" judgement that maybe some readers can't be objective of a 90s comic with that in the back of their head. That's no offense to anyone that doesn't like 90s comics. I can't read anything older than late 60s cause it all seems silly and ridiculous, and I can't get past that to be objective with the story. Especially Batman, with the way I read him in the 90s and by watching Burton's Batman and Batman:TAS. Yeah, I think that's part of it. There is a sense in many people's minds that the '90s were the worst decade for comics because they were buying into the hype around the most popular comics of the era and the collectability of those comics. That is the most present memory of that time, but it's a skewed memory, much like we don't remember the terrible books of previous eras because the best ones are so ingrained in our perception of comics. In fact, I'd argue it's almost a complete inverse of that phenomenon-- it's the terrible books of the '90s that people remember almost exclusively, not the actual good ones. When we see a lot of these review threads here, we see that even the classic books of the past weren't all that great, but had great moments, great issues, great runs. Somehow, the '90s don't get that benefit.
|
|
|
Post by Cei-U! on Apr 3, 2015 13:14:00 GMT -5
Golden and Silver Age fan though I am, I've got far too many first-rate comics from the '90s in my collection to ever credibly jump on the "90s comics suck!" bandwagon.
Cei-U! Just sayin'!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2015 18:57:29 GMT -5
I finished the second Usagi Saga from Dark Horse. I think at this point I notice that while the series is still made up of a series of done-in-one and short arcs, he's turning it into a more ongoing serial where the time lapse between one arc and the next is more definite than before. In the earlier stories, when one story ended there were pretty much no loose threads and it was done. And the next story had little or no connection to the last. It could be the next day, a year later, a decade later, or even possibly a prior event. Who knows.
But now we know it's a forward progression. One arc ends with Usagi going off to cash Gen's bounty claim, the next arc he cashes the claim. There were consistent loose threads at the end of each story that would tie into the next, even as little as passing someone in a crowd, who would be a major character in the next arc. I think this is an improvement on the series but at the same time I did enjoy the more isolated episodes from before as well.
|
|
|
Post by cromagnonman on Apr 4, 2015 4:17:48 GMT -5
Age of Apocalypse is quite a good story , IMO. it was far far better than other X-Men stories of that time, and benefited from shaking up continuity and not having to adhere to the same old formula. X-Men had become trapped by continuity by the time AoA came around.
Am continuing on with reading early 80's Spider man, just read Amazing Annual #15. Really great issue IMO, writer Dennis o Neil , art by Miller/Janson team. Ish had a lot of Miller DD flavour, shame he didn't have a proper run on Spidey.
|
|
|
Post by Spike-X on Apr 4, 2015 5:37:49 GMT -5
I picked up the New Frontier deluxe HC today. I'd read the issues digitally years ago, but in no way did that format do justice to such a beautiful piece of work.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 4, 2015 13:40:12 GMT -5
I picked up the New Frontier deluxe HC today. I'd read the issues digitally years ago, but in no way did that format do justice to such a beautiful piece of work. Our library had a copy of the Absolute Edition, and once I read it in that format I didn't want to go back to standard format for the glorious Cooke art. The standard size (to use your words) didn't do the work justice. I just can't afford to go out and buy the Absolute format, but I am spoiled on it now. -M
|
|
|
Post by Spike-X on Apr 4, 2015 18:32:01 GMT -5
The Absolute Edition was a bit out of my price range. Even this one was pricier than I was expecting/hoping, but it's oversized, so it's a good compromise.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2015 7:32:00 GMT -5
I've been reading Byrne's Namor series (but I haven't read anything for the past two days because some kind of plague has made its way into our house), and though it is quite a different Namor than has ever been written before (or since), it's classic Byrne fun, and I love it. I tried reading it about a year ago, but didn't have near the appreciation for it that I do now.
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Apr 5, 2015 8:34:29 GMT -5
I've been reading Byrne's Namor series (but I haven't read anything for the past two days because some kind of plague has made its way into our house), and though it is quite a different Namor than has ever been written before (or since), it's classic Byrne fun, and I love it. I tried reading it about a year ago, but didn't have near the appreciation for it that I do now. Yeah, Byrne took the arrogant and aggressive Namor and made him mild.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2015 11:47:43 GMT -5
I've been reading Byrne's Namor series (but I haven't read anything for the past two days because some kind of plague has made its way into our house), and though it is quite a different Namor than has ever been written before (or since), it's classic Byrne fun, and I love it. I tried reading it about a year ago, but didn't have near the appreciation for it that I do now. Yeah, Byrne took the arrogant and aggressive Namor and made him mild. Yes, he softened him quite a bit. I see it more as him focusing a bit more on aspects of Namor that were never really focused on before (or at least shown). Things fans knew existed, but we never got to see in great detail.
|
|