|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2017 8:48:45 GMT -5
There's a line in a Doug Moench written Batman comic from the 90s that I used to have written down in a list of inspirational quotes I used to put up in my classroom blackboard each day when I was teaching. I've lost the list and cannot remember the exact quote, but to paraphrase it from memory...
Hate is powerful and all encompassing. A mind that holds onto hate has no room for anything else.
It was Bats waxing about the tragic fate of a villain iirc, but it has a lot of general "truthiness" about hate. People get so focused on what they hate about things, they forget what they love and it sours them in general. This is particularly true among fan bases of many things from comics to sports to pop culture in general, not to mention real life aspects.
It's pretty much why I have avoided posting things I dislike in this thread and have only really countered some points made by others.
-M
|
|
The Captain
CCF Mod Squad
Posts: 4,919 
Member is Online
|
Post by The Captain on Sept 11, 2017 9:31:11 GMT -5
There's a line in a Doug Moench written Batman comic from the 90s that I used to have written down in a list of inspirational quotes I used to put up in my classroom blackboard each day when I was teaching. I've lost the list and cannot remember the exact quote, but to paraphrase it from memory... Hate is powerful and all encompassing. A mind that holds onto hate has no room for anything else. It was Bats waxing about the tragic fate of a villain iirc, but it has a lot of general "truthiness" about hate. People get so focused on what they hate about things, they forget what they love and it sours them in general. This is particularly true among fan bases of many things from comics to sports to pop culture in general, not to mention real life aspects. It's pretty much why I have avoided posting things I dislike in this thread and have only really countered some points made by others. -M I like this. Do I "hate" Rick Jones? Not really. I don't like the character in the least, and I cringe every time he shows up in a book I'm reading, but it isn't as though I'm thinking about him when I'm making dinner or playing a game with my kids or hanging out with friends, and I'm not thinking about him when I'm reading othet comics that he's not in. |
|
|
|
Post by Rob Allen on Sept 11, 2017 17:55:27 GMT -5
Still, I figure the tonal switch from the relatively serious first Superman stories to the more comedy-centric mid '40s Superman - with Suzie Thomkins and the Prankster - was due to Captain Marvel's popularity. That's certainly possible, but I've read that Jerry Siegel really liked writing comedy, so he could have been just following his muse. I suppose both could be true. |
|
|
|
Post by Cei-U! on Sept 11, 2017 21:38:35 GMT -5
The switchover started happening late in '42. I think it had less to do with the Captain Marvel influence than it did with wartime editor Jack Schiff and Siegel looking to break Superman away from the generic super-heroics the strip had largely consisted of up to that point, especially since throwing the Big Blue S into the war had been declared vout of bounds editorially.
Cei-U!
I cite my research for Chapter 3!
|
|
|
|
Post by chadwilliam on Sept 13, 2017 19:06:59 GMT -5
...how blatantly MAD was ripped off by others.
I don't fault anyone for wanting to cash in on MAD's success by putting out their own humour magazine or comic and I'm certainly not suggesting that the history of comics isn't replete with examples of one company "borrowing" ideas from a rival, but stuff like Cracked, Thimk, Not Brand Ecch, etc. are all anathema to what comics should be.
It isn't just the homely looking mascot, or the back ground gags, or the fourth wall breaking, or the self-deprecating highfalutin dialogue, or the pretense of being off-the-wall when all you're doing is taking care not to deviate one iota from that issue of MAD you're swiping from - it's all of those things and more.
I can only imagine the tongue lashing a writer would receive if, in crafting something for one of these rags, he accidentally let something original slip in.
Why is it that when a rival company wanted to enjoy the popularity of, say, Superman, they often came up with something like Superman but wasn't exactly Superman, but when they wanted to cash in on MAD, they came up with a poor man's MAD? Would MAD have had more trouble suing due to parody laws or something?
|
|
|
|
Post by hondobrode on Sept 13, 2017 23:33:28 GMT -5
I think you've hit the nail on the head with the nature of parody and satire
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2017 0:25:17 GMT -5
I hate (not literally) the Suit of Captain Marvel and Superman
 VS  To me, I've been thinking about this for awhile and I thought the suit that literally eats away both creators and eventually both parties losing some respect and we all know who came out victorious and I'm not going to bother with it. I just wished that both parties didn't hate each other in the first place and I felt that both characters Captain Marvel (I'm 58 years of age) and knowing that I loved the old movie serials and I remember going to the theatres watching reruns of both Captain Marvel and Superman I was in awe of the superpowers that both of them have. These two heroes are in my top 5 DC and Marvel Heroes and Heroines and they both are totally different and yet similar in more ways in one. The Suit changes everything and that's why I have a hard time accepting it and that when I hate the creators of both heroes in terms of trying to get the upper hand of all that. They are equally blamed for that and that's my opinion and you can't change that at all. I'm very firm on that and that's why I felt that both heroes have equal and lasting legacies and that's why Superman comes out on top in the popularity and in good reasons and Captain Marvel never, ever had a break at all. We've have seen countless cartoons, movies, television, radio, comic books, and much much more of SUPERMAN and not enough CAPTAIN MARVEL and that's bother me a lot these days. How many movies did Superman appears ... I lost count of them. How many movies did Captain Marvel appears .... NONE. That's my friend that's why I hate the SUIT in the first place. |
|
|
|
Post by Cei-U! on Sept 14, 2017 7:20:18 GMT -5
The creators of Superman had nothing to do with the lawsuit, CC. It was DC executives, the actual holders of the copyright/trademark, who were responsible. Siegel and Shuster had no say in the matter and by the time the case was settled weren't even working on the character anymore. As for Captain Marvel, he was created to be a copy of the Man of Tomorrow, circulation director Roscoe Fawcett's marching orders specifically saying,"Give me a Superman whose other self is a 10-year-old boy." That Cap creators Bill Parker and C.C. Beck made him so much more than that has everything to do with why he not only survived but thrived (at one point in the '40s, Captain Marvel Adventures was published twice a month and sold a million copies per issue) when other ersatz Supermen like Fox's Wonder Man folded under DC's legal onslaught.
Cei-U!
I summon the FYI!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2017 8:25:05 GMT -5
The creators of Superman had nothing to do with the lawsuit, CC. It was DC executives, the actual holders of the copyright/trademark, who were responsible. Siegel and Shuster had no say in the matter and by the time the case was settled weren't even working on the character anymore. As for Captain Marvel, he was created to be a copy of the Man of Tomorrow, circulation director Roscoe Fawcett's marching orders specifically saying,"Give me a Superman whose other self is a 10-year-old boy." That Cap creators Bill Parker and C.C. Beck made him so much more than that has everything to do with why he not only survived but thrived (at one point in the '40s, Captain Marvel Adventures was published twice a month and sold a million copies per issue) when other ersatz Supermen like Fox's Wonder Man folded under DC's legal onslaught. Cei-U! I summon the FYI! I understand that and I just get more confused as I try to understand all the legal mumbo jumbo going on and I felt that Siegal and Shuster did not get anything out of it and that's makes me mad. Thanks for this post and it's still bothers me not as much 15-20 years ago of which I was very angry at DC Comics not doing anything with Superman's Co-Creators. |
|
The Captain
CCF Mod Squad
Posts: 4,919
Member is Online
|
Post by The Captain on Sept 14, 2017 15:17:49 GMT -5
...when I think I own a comic that I don't, and I get to the place where it should be in a series that I'm reading and it isn't there, forcing me to stop reading said series and go on a frantic search for the missing book before resuming reading said series.
Currently doimg this with Power Man #26, which I've been under the impression that I've owned for years now. Thankfully it doesn't have any ties to the Luke Cage TV series (like "first appearance of villain's third flunkie from the left"), so it isn't terribly expensive yet.
Going on a hunt on Saturday for it, and hopefully going to find some of my Flash issue wants as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by masterofquackfu on Sept 16, 2017 8:17:16 GMT -5
I've thought about a few more characters that I completely dislike:
Gilgamesh...like Dr. Druid, dude should not even sniffed an Avengers roster spot.
Sersi...not interesting in any way...bland character
Firelord....don't know...just never liked him.
The more I think about it, the more I realize that the Avengers needed to be more picky in their membership back in the day.
|
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Sept 16, 2017 10:27:13 GMT -5
I agree. I don't think that Sersi fit the team.
|
|
|
|
Post by String on Sept 16, 2017 20:15:10 GMT -5
The creators of Superman had nothing to do with the lawsuit, CC. It was DC executives, the actual holders of the copyright/trademark, who were responsible. Siegel and Shuster had no say in the matter and by the time the case was settled weren't even working on the character anymore. As for Captain Marvel, he was created to be a copy of the Man of Tomorrow, circulation director Roscoe Fawcett's marching orders specifically saying,"Give me a Superman whose other self is a 10-year-old boy." That Cap creators Bill Parker and C.C. Beck made him so much more than that has everything to do with why he not only survived but thrived (at one point in the '40s, Captain Marvel Adventures was published twice a month and sold a million copies per issue) when other ersatz Supermen like Fox's Wonder Man folded under DC's legal onslaught. Cei-U! I summon the FYI! How long did the lawsuit drag out in court? And did DC gain immediate rights to the characters upon it's settlement? For I was reading an article in Back Issue about Shazam in the Bronze Age. I may have misread part of it for I understood that for awhile there, DC had to lease the characters at first or didn't have exclusive rights/authority to publish them as they wished till later and that was one factor in delaying the new Shazam title to the 70s instead of relaunching him with the other DC stalwarts back during the Silver Age. |
|
|
|
Post by Cei-U! on Sept 16, 2017 21:42:26 GMT -5
The creators of Superman had nothing to do with the lawsuit, CC. It was DC executives, the actual holders of the copyright/trademark, who were responsible. Siegel and Shuster had no say in the matter and by the time the case was settled weren't even working on the character anymore. As for Captain Marvel, he was created to be a copy of the Man of Tomorrow, circulation director Roscoe Fawcett's marching orders specifically saying,"Give me a Superman whose other self is a 10-year-old boy." That Cap creators Bill Parker and C.C. Beck made him so much more than that has everything to do with why he not only survived but thrived (at one point in the '40s, Captain Marvel Adventures was published twice a month and sold a million copies per issue) when other ersatz Supermen like Fox's Wonder Man folded under DC's legal onslaught. Cei-U! I summon the FYI! How long did the lawsuit drag out in court? And did DC gain immediate rights to the characters upon it's settlement? For I was reading an article in Back Issue about Shazam in the Bronze Age. I may have misread part of it for I understood that for awhile there, DC had to lease the characters at first or didn't have exclusive rights/authority to publish them as they wished till later and that was one factor in delaying the new Shazam title to the 70s instead of relaunching him with the other DC stalwarts back during the Silver Age. The suit was laid to rest in 1953 when Fawcett decided it was cheaper to stop publishing comics than to keep fighting DC in court. Fawcett retained the rights to all their non-licensed properties. They leased the rights to the Marvel Family characters to DC in 1973. The deal did not include the other Fawcett heroes so editor Julius Schwartz got the company in trouble when he used Bulletman, Spy Smasher, et al in Justice League of America #135-137. I was out of comics when Fawcett finally sold all their characters to DC so the closest I can tell you is it happened sometime between Crisis On Infinite Earths in '86 and the Power of Shazam graphic novel by Ordway in '94. Cei-U! I summon the magic lightning! |
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Sept 17, 2017 0:02:38 GMT -5
I've thought about a few more characters that I completely dislike: Gilgamesh...like Dr. Druid, dude should not even sniffed an Avengers roster spot. Sersi...not interesting in any way...bland character Firelord....don't know...just never liked him. The more I think about it, the more I realize that the Avengers needed to be more picky in their membership back in the day. Love Sersi and the Forgotten One in Kirby's Eternals series. I have not read their Avengers appearances so I'm not too clear on how they were written there but it wouldn't surprise me if they weren't a good fit for that kind of comic. The fact that you found Sersi bland suggests they didn't get the character right: I can imagine some readers finding the opposite fault with her - that she was too flamboyant and over-the-top - but certainly she was anything but bland in the Eternals. |
|
