|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on Apr 10, 2019 16:44:39 GMT -5
I know Marvel enjoyed rubbing it in fans' faces when they ditched the Comics Code Authority, beginning with X-Force #116.  I don't recall if they cursed in that issue, but I wouldn't be surprised. Marvel was also running the MAX imprint around this time, intended for more mature audiences. So I'm sure a lot of "firsts" appropriate to this thread occurred there. (A) I loved this run of X-Force. (B) I believe Alias/Jessica Jones was the first Marvel Max book, and the very first word on page one was (obviously) F***. |
|
|
|
Post by crazyoldhermit on Apr 11, 2019 23:40:47 GMT -5
I thought there was another swear word in All Star Batman -- this one applied to Batgirl beginning with a 'c' - which was also ''accidentally'' not properly blacked out. I know Frank Miller has been involved with The Comic Book Legal Defence fund, but is this the sort of cause they champion?
Anyhow, its pretty pathetic when this is what Miller has to stoop for to get interest in a follow up to Dark Knight/Year One.
I remember being surprised as a kid to read a story in Batman From the 30's to the 70's in which The Joker attempts to make ''jackasses'' out of Batman and Robin. It was a tale from the 50's and I was sure that was a swear word. My parents assured me it wasn't but it still feels weird. Weird seeing it in a story from then, I mean. Yep, Batgirl was called a 'c' four times in three panels on a single page.
Who knows what Miller was thinking.
|
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Apr 12, 2019 0:03:45 GMT -5
I thought there was another swear word in All Star Batman -- this one applied to Batgirl beginning with a 'c' - which was also ''accidentally'' not properly blacked out. I know Frank Miller has been involved with The Comic Book Legal Defence fund, but is this the sort of cause they champion?
Anyhow, its pretty pathetic when this is what Miller has to stoop for to get interest in a follow up to Dark Knight/Year One.
I remember being surprised as a kid to read a story in Batman From the 30's to the 70's in which The Joker attempts to make ''jackasses'' out of Batman and Robin. It was a tale from the 50's and I was sure that was a swear word. My parents assured me it wasn't but it still feels weird. Weird seeing it in a story from then, I mean. Yep, Batgirl was called a 'c' four times in three panels on a single page.
Who knows what Miller was thinking.
By every appearance he was neck deep in serious substance abuse problems. |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,874
|
Post by shaxper on Apr 12, 2019 7:50:22 GMT -5
I thought there was another swear word in All Star Batman -- this one applied to Batgirl beginning with a 'c' - which was also ''accidentally'' not properly blacked out. I know Frank Miller has been involved with The Comic Book Legal Defence fund, but is this the sort of cause they champion?
Anyhow, its pretty pathetic when this is what Miller has to stoop for to get interest in a follow up to Dark Knight/Year One.
I remember being surprised as a kid to read a story in Batman From the 30's to the 70's in which The Joker attempts to make ''jackasses'' out of Batman and Robin. It was a tale from the 50's and I was sure that was a swear word. My parents assured me it wasn't but it still feels weird. Weird seeing it in a story from then, I mean. Yep, Batgirl was called a 'c' four times in three panels on a single page. Who knows what Miller was thinking.
I did a pretty deep analysis back at CBR ages back that has since been lost to the ages. I was probably giving Miller too much credit, but here was the basic gist: 1. Miller's Batman was ALWAYS unhinged, just less so. He's calm but sociopathic in Year One, and unhinged in DKR. 2. The basic premise of All-Star B&R was to explore the idea of what makes a person dress up as a Bat and fight crime. Gotham City, itself, becomes the central character of the early issues, shaping and corrupting everyone it touches. The coloring of each issue subtly expresses this, using moody blues and sultry reds to depict Gotham and its inhabitants, Dick Grayson bathed in a nurturing yellow glow in contrast. And, once he is under Batman's spell, we see a lot of white. 3. When Batman meets Dick Grayson, he first corrupts Dick and essentially gives him Stockholm Syndrome. That moment where they are painting the room golden yellow to trap Green Lantern feels like an intentional contrast to the color schemes I noted in #2. But that incident shows Bruce the error of his ways, and as they return to the source of their pain (dead parents), it gives the two the opportunity to rebuild themselves as more stable and more heroic...together. 4. In DKR, Bruce is unhinged because of the death of Jason Todd. We later learn in the sequel that the ultimate fate of Dick unhinged him too. In short, had All-Star B&R kept going, I think we would have seen a Batman and Robin much closer to what we would have expected, barely keeping it together TOGETHER, much in the same spirit as the Mike W. Barr stories from the 1980s, where the two seemed mutually dependent upon each other for keeping their demons in check. Fans turned on Miller primarily because of the delays (which were largely Jim Lee's fault). Miller was taking too long to develop things, but I think he ultimately could have justified what he was doing with the title. As for Holy Terror...well, I won't even read that one. No doubt Miller was unhinged, but I'm not sure he was so much worse in the 2000s than he was in the 1980s, and I believe there was a plan for Batman that would have justified much of the early characterization. |
|
|
|
Post by String on Apr 12, 2019 11:55:00 GMT -5
Inspired by @draketungsten thread on the modern board... So what is the first mainstream comic to use the word "hell" or "damn?" I assume that (A) undergrounds, (B) european, and (C) Japanese comics broke the profanity barrier first. (Zap # 0 (1968) has "Ah, your fullaf &*$^ you bitch" onthe first page.) I'd further assume that the culprit was a non-code-approved magazine rather than a four color comic. But I'm interested in the four-color comics, too! Non editorially approved, the cover to Ka-Zar # 1 (1970) supposedly has the f-word hidden on Zabu's back, but... yeah. I dunno if that's 100% intentional. Some thoughts: As intestine-draped as they were, I don't remember any profanity in EC comics. I'm poorly read in the Warren Magazines but from what little I've seen there wasn't a helluvalotta profanity there. My spotty/quick internet research backs me up on this. "Damn" and "hell" were used fairly regularly in code approved newstand delivered Marvel comics by the mid-1970s. These light curses mostly vanished in the '80s under Shooter. ( They were removed from newstand books altogether.) Although, conversely, DC didn't seem to allow swearing in the '70s but became much more liberal than Marvel in the '80s. If I remember right, Sandman (The Gaiman version) was the first American corporate produced regular sized factory system book to use the f with permission. Although it had to have shown up in magazines before that. I'm not sure most people these days consider "hell" or "damn" to be swearing. Certainly, British comics had characters using those terms in the 1970's, if not before. I'm curious. I don't know if this is cultural stereotyping but sometime over these many years, I've gained the impression that the word 'bloody' is considered a far worse cuss word to the British than the examples given here. Accurate or no? |
|
|
|
Post by String on Apr 12, 2019 12:00:15 GMT -5
Eh. Poop is nothing, I don't see any issue there. But I grew up religious, and saying "oh my god" was just flat out not done, period. No swearing at all allowed, of course, but especially you never took the lord's name in vain. So I get where he's coming from. That's still a big, big no no in some circles. I rarely hear OMG these days and in these terms, that may be the lightest example of such. The GD word may be more common but the worst one appears to be 'Jesus H Christ' or some variation thereof. |
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Apr 12, 2019 12:03:56 GMT -5
I'm not sure most people these days consider "hell" or "damn" to be swearing. Certainly, British comics had characters using those terms in the 1970's, if not before. I'm curious. I don't know if this is cultural stereotyping but sometime over these many years, I've gained the impression that the word 'bloody' is considered a far worse cuss word to the British than the examples given here. Accurate or no? It certainly was for some periods of time; don't know about today. If you watch British programs from the 1970s and earlier, you only hear it in truly adult programs and sparingly. I know the rules for the BBC and other networks changed around the 80s or just after, where you could have adult language after 10:00 pm (or somewhere around that time). |
|
|
|
Post by badwolf on Apr 12, 2019 12:25:10 GMT -5
It's been my understanding that "bloody" is the equivalent of "f'ing."
|
|
|
|
Post by crazyoldhermit on Apr 12, 2019 21:44:05 GMT -5
Yep, Batgirl was called a 'c' four times in three panels on a single page. Who knows what Miller was thinking.
I did a pretty deep analysis back at CBR ages back that has since been lost to the ages. I was probably giving Miller too much credit, but here was the basic gist: 1. Miller's Batman was ALWAYS unhinged, just less so. He's calm but sociopathic in Year One, and unhinged in DKR. 2. The basic premise of All-Star B&R was to explore the idea of what makes a person dress up as a Bat and fight crime. Gotham City, itself, becomes the central character of the early issues, shaping and corrupting everyone it touches. The coloring of each issue subtly expresses this, using moody blues and sultry reds to depict Gotham and its inhabitants, Dick Grayson bathed in a nurturing yellow glow in contrast. And, once he is under Batman's spell, we see a lot of white. 3. When Batman meets Dick Grayson, he first corrupts Dick and essentially gives him Stockholm Syndrome. That moment where they are painting the room golden yellow to trap Green Lantern feels like an intentional contrast to the color schemes I noted in #2. But that incident shows Bruce the error of his ways, and as they return to the source of their pain (dead parents), it gives the two the opportunity to rebuild themselves as more stable and more heroic...together. 4. In DKR, Bruce is unhinged because of the death of Jason Todd. We later learn in the sequel that the ultimate fate of Dick unhinged him too. In short, had All-Star B&R kept going, I think we would have seen a Batman and Robin much closer to what we would have expected, barely keeping it together TOGETHER, much in the same spirit as the Mike W. Barr stories from the 1980s, where the two seemed mutually dependent upon each other for keeping their demons in check. Fans turned on Miller primarily because of the delays (which were largely Jim Lee's fault). Miller was taking too long to develop things, but I think he ultimately could have justified what he was doing with the title. As for Holy Terror...well, I won't even read that one. No doubt Miller was unhinged, but I'm not sure he was so much worse in the 2000s than he was in the 1980s, and I believe there was a plan for Batman that would have justified much of the early characterization. I disagree with the assessment of Miller's Batman as sociopathic, because in Year One he displays a tremendous amount of empathy. The big Batman moments that stick out in Year One are him making himself vulnerable to the police by saving an old woman from an oncoming truck, and diving off a bridge to save a baby. Miller's Batman is intense, driven, haunted and focused, and I wouldn't say a screw or two isn't loose (at least in Year One and DKR - bets are off the table where DKSA is concerned), but sociopath isn't a word I would use. That'd something I'd reserve more for the likes of Ennis' Frank Castle.
I feel like ASBAR is one of the greatest missed opportunities in modern comic book history. It was essentially a direct sequel to Year One.
It's a story of a Batman who has fallen deep into the abyss and has lost all touch with reality. When Dick Grayson's parents are murdered he immediately empathizes with the boy and sees himself in him. To protect the boy from corrupt police Batman whisks him away (abducts him) and inducts him into his vigilante life. As they spend time together Batman realizes the mistakes he has made in his own life, and seeks to avoid doing the same damage to Dick. He allows Dick to grieve for his parents, and for the first time opens himself up emotionally to grieve for his own. And then there's the reveal that a new criminal, an ironically humorless psychopath called the Joker, murdered the Graysons.
This all falls roughly in line with the Golden Age story: A dark, monstrous Batman getting lightened up by his young sidekick and facing his arch-nemesis for the first time. Even details like Batman cloistering Dick in his home are taken from Detective Comics #38, they're just twisted with a modern perspective.
The problems arise from the absolutely horrible dialog, glacial pacing, huge logical holes and the needless injection of subplots not even tangentially related to the main storyline. It's a crying shame I say.
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,221 
|
Post by Confessor on Apr 13, 2019 5:13:06 GMT -5
I'm not sure most people these days consider "hell" or "damn" to be swearing. Certainly, British comics had characters using those terms in the 1970's, if not before. I'm curious. I don't know if this is cultural stereotyping but sometime over these many years, I've gained the impression that the word 'bloody' is considered a far worse cuss word to the British than the examples given here. Accurate or no? It's been my understanding that "bloody" is the equivalent of "f'ing." "Bloody" is definitely a more severe swear word in the UK than it is in the States, and, yes, it is considered worse than "damn" and "hell". As a kid, "bloody" was definitely a forbidden word -- not just for me, but among my friends too. No way is it the equivalent of "f***ing" though, which is a full on expletive. "Bloody" is, according to my Chambers English dictionary, a mildly offensive intensifier, as in, "This weather is too bloody hot!" "F***ing", on the other hand, is a sexually derived piece of vulgar slang and considered much more offensive than "bloody". As for this thread in general, I can't imagine anyone I know or have ever known in Britain getting out of bed about a child using the terms "Hell" or "Damn". These are not swear words. And as tingramretro points out, both were fairly common in children's comics and pre-watershed TV in the '70s and '80s. Let's be clear about this though: neither "hell" or "damn" are actually expletives or pieces of sexual or vulgar slang. "Hell" is simply an intensifier, and "damn" is sometimes used as an intensifier, and sometimes as an interjection to express anger, irritation, contempt, or disappointment. The religious connotations of the word "damn" or "hell" are basically irrelevant in Britain. |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,874
|
Post by shaxper on Apr 13, 2019 8:40:32 GMT -5
I did a pretty deep analysis back at CBR ages back that has since been lost to the ages. I was probably giving Miller too much credit, but here was the basic gist: 1. Miller's Batman was ALWAYS unhinged, just less so. He's calm but sociopathic in Year One, and unhinged in DKR. 2. The basic premise of All-Star B&R was to explore the idea of what makes a person dress up as a Bat and fight crime. Gotham City, itself, becomes the central character of the early issues, shaping and corrupting everyone it touches. The coloring of each issue subtly expresses this, using moody blues and sultry reds to depict Gotham and its inhabitants, Dick Grayson bathed in a nurturing yellow glow in contrast. And, once he is under Batman's spell, we see a lot of white. 3. When Batman meets Dick Grayson, he first corrupts Dick and essentially gives him Stockholm Syndrome. That moment where they are painting the room golden yellow to trap Green Lantern feels like an intentional contrast to the color schemes I noted in #2. But that incident shows Bruce the error of his ways, and as they return to the source of their pain (dead parents), it gives the two the opportunity to rebuild themselves as more stable and more heroic...together. 4. In DKR, Bruce is unhinged because of the death of Jason Todd. We later learn in the sequel that the ultimate fate of Dick unhinged him too. In short, had All-Star B&R kept going, I think we would have seen a Batman and Robin much closer to what we would have expected, barely keeping it together TOGETHER, much in the same spirit as the Mike W. Barr stories from the 1980s, where the two seemed mutually dependent upon each other for keeping their demons in check. Fans turned on Miller primarily because of the delays (which were largely Jim Lee's fault). Miller was taking too long to develop things, but I think he ultimately could have justified what he was doing with the title. As for Holy Terror...well, I won't even read that one. No doubt Miller was unhinged, but I'm not sure he was so much worse in the 2000s than he was in the 1980s, and I believe there was a plan for Batman that would have justified much of the early characterization. I disagree with the assessment of Miller's Batman as sociopathic, because in Year One he displays a tremendous amount of empathy. The big Batman moments that stick out in Year One are him making himself vulnerable to the police by saving an old woman from an oncoming truck, and diving off a bridge to save a baby. Miller's Batman is intense, driven, haunted and focused, and I wouldn't say a screw or two isn't loose (at least in Year One and DKR - bets are off the table where DKSA is concerned), but sociopath isn't a word I would use. That'd something I'd reserve more for the likes of Ennis' Frank Castle. I got into a prolonged debate with someone about this in the old CBR community way back in the day who made the exact same point. Was that you? My response then was that, for Miller's Batman, "All sense left my life" once his parents died. He never again shows emotion until All-Star Batman, a year later down the line. Whenever he saves someone (including a cat) in Year One, it is a logical decision as an extension of his mission. A machine could have made the same decision based upon the pre-loaded protocols. That person also brought up that Bruce smiles when he returns to Wayne Manor. I scanned the image and posted it -- there is no clear smile, just a semi-relaxed expression. There are no other moments anywhere in Year One where Bruce appears to express any emotion at all beyond frustration in failing to fulfill his mission. I don't want to sidetrack this thread. Just felt the need to answer this. Miller's Batman is all about his quest to control his feelings. Thus he allows none in Year One but is brimming to the top with them by the time of All-Star Batman & Robin, because it's now been a year, and even in attaining his goal of becoming a crime fighter, nothing has gotten better. |
|
|
|
Post by chaykinstevens on Apr 13, 2019 15:45:42 GMT -5
It's been my understanding that "bloody" is the equivalent of "f'ing." The great British punk poet John Cooper Clarke's Evidently Chickentown was originally full of "bloody"s, but he later changed then to the stronger "f***ing"s when he performed in the USA, on realising the original term was unknown to most yanks. I think the line "The f***ing food is f***ing muck, the f***ing drains are f***ing f***ed" was greatly improved. linkI think Doug Moench used to have Black Jack Tarr refer to Shang-Chi as a "bloody Chinaman" without the Comics Code Authority complaining. |
|
|
|
Post by chaykinstevens on Apr 13, 2019 15:58:57 GMT -5
Dane McGowan's first word in the Invisibles #1, cover dated September 1994, was "F***!" but spelled with nine "u"s.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mormel on Apr 13, 2019 16:38:38 GMT -5
"Bloody" is definitely a more severe swear word in the UK than it is in the States, and, yes, it is considered worse than "damn" and "hell". As a kid, "bloody" was definitely a forbidden word -- not just for me, but among my friends too. No way is it the equivalent of "f***ing" though, which is a full on expletive. "Bloody" is, according to my Chambers English dictionary, a mildly offensive intensifier, as in, "This weather is too bloody hot!" "F***ing", on the other hand, is a sexually derived piece of vulgar slang and considered much more offensive than "bloody". I recall watching the live children's programme Smile on the BBC back in 2003, where presenter Reggie Yates accidentally slipped in a 'bloody' and had to apologize immediately after. This made an impression on me, since I'm from the Netherlands where people will swear and curse left and right in kids shows and no one will give a hoot. That's an exaggeration, but Holland is pretty cavalier with profanity in the media. |
|
|
|
Post by tingramretro on Apr 13, 2019 19:57:50 GMT -5
I'm not sure most people these days consider "hell" or "damn" to be swearing. Certainly, British comics had characters using those terms in the 1970's, if not before. I'm curious. I don't know if this is cultural stereotyping but sometime over these many years, I've gained the impression that the word 'bloody' is considered a far worse cuss word to the British than the examples given here. Accurate or no? Not really, no. I don't think it's considered swearing at all, these days, though it was a mild swear word when I was a kid. |
|
