|
Post by String on Oct 13, 2021 9:42:23 GMT -5
Could. Not. Disagree. More. First off, it's bomber jackets and it is an iconic look, it's representative of the 90s. It gave a unifying look to the overall team which was different. I don't think that word means what you think it means. Considering the level of vitriol that this specific look seems to generate,even here, then it can be iconic for a variety of reasons.
|
|
|
Post by String on Oct 13, 2021 9:52:35 GMT -5
So many people get hung up on the jackets, as if it were the eras defining trait. I'll have you know the X-Men also sported the same look and no one ever seems to give them flack over it... True, but X-Men was more of a "school" so unifying jackets was more ok in a way. Also NONE of the mutants wear capes or are clad in armor or immortal. It just didn't feel or look proper in Avengers for the team to wear jackets. Just one cranky, grumpy old man's opinion which seems to be the same as many other readers. So Magneto should never wear one because it would interfere with his cape? Colossus should never wear one because it would tarnish his armored form? Technically Cannonball is immortal so he should've ditched his jacket during his time with X-Force?
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Oct 13, 2021 9:56:57 GMT -5
I don't think that word means what you think it means. Considering the level of vitriol that this specific look seems to generate, even here, then it can be iconic for a variety of reasons. But you're changing the meaning of iconic to fit there. The textbook definition of iconic (in this case) is "widely known and acknowledged especially for distinctive excellence." Nobody is recognizing bomber jackets as being excellent. It really doesn't even fit the definition of "relating to an icon," because the look wasn't around long enough or important enough to make any real impact. It is remember, largely with disdain, by comic nerds of a certain age.
|
|
|
Post by MDG on Oct 13, 2021 10:05:57 GMT -5
Considering the level of vitriol that this specific look seems to generate, even here, then it can be iconic for a variety of reasons. But you're changing the meaning of iconic to fit there. The textbook definition of iconic (in this case) is "widely known and acknowledged especially for distinctive excellence." Nobody is recognizing bomber jackets as being excellent. It really doesn't even fit the definition of "relating to an icon," because the look wasn't around long enough or important enough to make any real impact. It is remember, largely with disdain, by comic nerds of a certain age. I listen to enough movie and comic podcasts that if I took a drink every time someone wrongly called something "iconic", I'd be $#!tfaced 23 hours a day.
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Oct 13, 2021 10:24:13 GMT -5
But you're changing the meaning of iconic to fit there. The textbook definition of iconic (in this case) is "widely known and acknowledged especially for distinctive excellence." Nobody is recognizing bomber jackets as being excellent. It really doesn't even fit the definition of "relating to an icon," because the look wasn't around long enough or important enough to make any real impact. It is remember, largely with disdain, by comic nerds of a certain age. I listen to enough movie and comic podcasts that if I took a drink every time someone wrongly called something "iconic", I'd be $#!tfaced 23 hours a day. I understand that the meaning of words changes over time. But I refuse to accept that iconic can be rendered to mean "anything I like." See also, unique and literal, as words that have lost all meaning.
|
|
|
Post by badwolf on Oct 13, 2021 11:32:01 GMT -5
I hear a lot of good things about Busiek's Avengers run, and I'm a big, big Astro City fan. But I'm reluctant to try it in case it's similar in feel to Busiek's Avengers/JLA 4-part crossover? I thought that was really bad.
I've read only the initial Morgan la Fay storyline, a few years afterwards in collected form. I actually didn't mind that one too much: sure, it was a very traditional, not to say predictable, Avengers story, but I imagine that was exactly what Busiek was going for at the time, kind of deliberately bringing back the classic 60s-70s-style Avengers after what I understand had been several years of erratic writing on the series (haven't read Marvel in general since the late 70s so I have only the haziest notion of what happened).
I had meant to try more of the Busiek/Perez Avengers but every time I've looked at something, even acclaimed storylines like Ultron, it hasn't appealed to me. Also most of the run seems to have a line-up that doesn't attract me : the new characters like Triathlon don't seem too interesting; hardly any of my favourites, e.g. the Black Panther, ever seem to be present (too bad, Perez drew a great Panther the few times I've seen him do it); and even with characters I do like, e.g. Thor, I'm not sure I'd like Busiek's take on them - I was really turned off by the way he wrote Thor in JLAvengers.
So for me, I think he actually got off to a pretty good start with the Morgan la Fay story, but it was all downhill from there. However, I acknowledge that it would be unfair of me to pass judgment on the entire run, not having read any of it apart from the first four plus maybe two or three isolated later issues.
I didn't like Triathlon much as a character, but I found his true story, when it was finally revealed, extremely interesting (and well-told.)
|
|
|
Post by brutalis on Oct 13, 2021 12:27:15 GMT -5
Y'all sure are hung up on jackets ain't ya? Here is my final point on jackets. We as frail mortal humanity wear jackets for protection against weather and for warmth.
Pilots wore bomber jackets in the early days as there was no internal heating in open cockpits of planes. As time passed insulated suits and pressurized planes allowed heating to be added. Jackets all became something they wear WHEN NOT FLYING A PLANE.
If a hero wears a cape as part of their costume then why would they ever feel the need to put on a jacket? If Hercules can spend his Immortal life more or less bare chested and bare legged then why would he feel the need to wear a jacket? Cap and Black Knight wear chain mail, so what more is a jacket doing for them? If as a team "off duty" hanging together a jacket is fine as part of an ensemble look. Going into BATTLE wearing one really doesn't provide "more" protection, and said jacket will be utterly torn apart. Just look at Luke Cage as an example.
And finally, in a fantasy based comic book the idea of heroes wearing jackets to me is just plain unnecessary. On some it might be an OK look but NOT on a team where the villain is rather unlikely to say, BAH, my defeat is due to those darn jackets which protected the hero(s) from my death ray.
End of discussion on jacket attire please?
Back to Avengering discussions of more importance, like why Jarvis health/medical insurance premium is likely sky high and that NO INSURANCE COMPANY would provide him life insurance!
|
|
Crimebuster
CCF Podcast Guru
Making comics!
Posts: 3,902
|
Post by Crimebuster on Oct 13, 2021 13:32:09 GMT -5
I didn't like the bomber jackets at the time because they were very much part of Bob Harras's determined attempts to make Avengers as much like X-Men as possible, which I found really annoying.
However, I would absolutely wear one of those jackets myself. That would be really cool.
|
|
|
Post by james on Oct 13, 2021 14:54:50 GMT -5
I wonder how hard Steve Epting fought to keep Hercules out of a jacket! Best part of that run was Hercules being Hercules. In a costume designed by Byrne by the way
|
|
|
Post by The Cheat on Oct 14, 2021 12:54:26 GMT -5
I didn't like the bomber jackets at the time because they were very much part of Bob Harras's determined attempts to make Avengers as much like X-Men as possible, which I found really annoying. When did the X-Men wear bomber jackets?
|
|
|
Post by tingramretro on Oct 14, 2021 17:21:11 GMT -5
I didn't like the bomber jackets at the time because they were very much part of Bob Harras's determined attempts to make Avengers as much like X-Men as possible, which I found really annoying. When did the X-Men wear bomber jackets? During the Grant Morrison era, they had something similar.
|
|
|
Post by chaykinstevens on Oct 14, 2021 17:48:56 GMT -5
When did the X-Men wear bomber jackets? During the Grant Morrison era, they had something similar. I don't think Harras and Epting were imitating the Morrison era look, unless they were precognitive.
|
|
|
Post by SJNeal on Oct 14, 2021 20:37:53 GMT -5
I didn't like the bomber jackets at the time because they were very much part of Bob Harras's determined attempts to make Avengers as much like X-Men as possible, which I found really annoying. When did the X-Men wear bomber jackets? Sporadically in the early 90's. Circa "X-Cutioner's Song" through "Fatal Attractions" I would say.
|
|
|
Post by SJNeal on Oct 14, 2021 20:39:31 GMT -5
I understand that the meaning of words changes over time. But I refuse to accept that iconic can be rendered to mean "anything I like." See also, unique and literal, as words that have lost all meaning. I blame the kids and their damn social media for this (and so many other evils in the world! ).
|
|
|
Post by spoon on Oct 14, 2021 22:51:49 GMT -5
I didn't like the bomber jackets at the time because they were very much part of Bob Harras's determined attempts to make Avengers as much like X-Men as possible, which I found really annoying. When did the X-Men wear bomber jackets? Not the whole team, and earlier than others have suggested in this thread. Rogue regularly wore a bomber jacket over her costume starting with X-Men #1. Cyclops also wore a bomber jacket as well around that time.
|
|