|
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2022 15:42:37 GMT -5
Today marks ten years since the first issue of John Byrne’s Trio was published:  I thought this anniversary might be a good “launching pad” to discuss “photocopy heroes”, whether they be Byrne’s - or anyone else’s. A quick note about Trio: as I made clear in another topic, not everything has to have depth for me. Sometimes I just want to see Hulk and Juggernaut fight in a parking lot. Other times I expect some depth/stakes - and @mrp made a good post recently about emotional stakes in a comic. Well, Trio wasn’t compelling for me in any way, shape or form. Why wouldn’t I just read an FF comic? I’ll never judge a writer/artist for “phoning it in” (how could I possibly be privy to their motivations, unless I had a desk right next to them), but it felt “phoned in”. I could be wrong. I was a little irked when Byrne posted something like “fanboys unleashed” a year or so ago, pertaining to Batman ‘89. It seemed very much “take the log out of your eye before you tell your brother to take the speck out of his eye”, given that he’d done a lot of “photocopy” characters for years - and his recent work included utilising his own speech bubbles on Star Trek: TOS stills. What of “photocopy characters” in general? Is imitation the sincerest form or flattery? You know, I seem to recall seeing ads and photos of cartoons such as Goober and the Ghost Chasers and Clue Club. I’ve never seen them (and perhaps shouldn’t judge them), but as Shawn Michaels once said, perception is everything; when I did see ads, I just thought I was looking at something that *might* have been an inferior bandwagon copy of Scooby-Doo. Who knows, perhaps those were GREAT cartoons, but perception and bias can lead a person to not bother with something. That’s just one example. Who’d want to watch Mac and Me? I didn’t (well, I did watch it and was disappointed). Or the “clones” of Michael Myers and Jason Voorhees? Sometimes the originals are strong, subjective though it is, and “photocopies” don’t interest me. I did quite enjoy Byrne’s Next Men, it was solid at least. But I had zero desire to read Triple Helix or Danger Unlimited. Maybe I’m missing something special by having let those pass me by, especially as I did enjoy Byrne’s work (I still consider his Superman origin to be definitive). This can apply to almost anything in life. On rare occasions, I might eat KFC. Well, in my city, I came across a food outlet called SFC (which I guess stands for Southern Fried Chicken). I guess the logo/branding was unique enough not to warrant any legal action. Did I eat in there? No, but why would I? When I have my rare fast food treat, I might as well get takeaway via Just Eat or something - and have it from KFC. Sometimes a “photocopy” (even when that term might not be appropriate) does surprise me. I quite liked the WWF’s Demolition, they carved out their own niche despite being inspired, at least in part I guess, by the Road Warriors of the NWA/JCP. That’s nice. I wouldn’t even use “photocopy” to describe them and their run. And, as I said, Next Men was a pleasant surprise. Overall, though, I find something lacking in “photocopies”, both from a perception angle and in how they can be executed. Thoughts? |
|
|
|
Post by MDG on May 9, 2022 15:50:49 GMT -5
If we want to dogpile on Byrne, he did this after She-Hulk...  |
|
|
|
Post by badwolf on May 9, 2022 16:32:01 GMT -5
It's been a long time since I read Danger Unlimited but I remember enjoying it. It was pretty clearly an FF homage; even one of the covers homaged FF #1.
I didn't think Babe was much like She-Hulk at all. The only similarity was that she was tall and strong.
I never did get to read all of Next Men but I'd like to.
Didn't know about Trio but I've been out of touch with new comics for a long time now. Would never have pegged that cover art as Byrne. Do we blame Joe Sinnott? I'm not one who dislikes his later, looser style but that particular picture does not look good. By Byrne standards anyway.
I wonder if anyone ever asked him to clarify his "fanboy" comment. I'm sure he could explain if someone asked politely.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2022 16:49:54 GMT -5
You know, I seem to recall seeing ads and photos of cartoons such as Goober and the Ghost Chasers and Clue Club. I’ve never seen them (and perhaps shouldn’t judge them), but as Shawn Michaels once said, perception is everything; when I did see ads, I just thought I was looking at something that *might* have been an inferior bandwagon copy of Scooby-Doo. Who knows, perhaps those were GREAT cartoons, but perception and bias can lead a person to not bother with something. That’s just one example. I'm a sucker for the Scooby-Doo knockoffs that were also made during the 70's as you can see from part of a DVD shelf just feet away from me as I type this. To me, they aren't really inferior but more of the same same. Hanna-Barbera just did a lot of "recycling" back then with the "Scooby-Doo formula", so in this case, the photocopy is more superficial to me since production-wise they are not much different. I still want to check out Trio and Next Men, I feel like every time I think to check them out, the trade collections are out of print!  |
|
|
|
Post by badwolf on May 9, 2022 17:05:34 GMT -5
Yeah, I'm disappointed there's no Next Men Omnibus.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2022 17:14:15 GMT -5
In terms of the broader question, I feel like if it's pretty "pure photocopy" with not much of a little spin of its own, it probably has less potential appeal to me. To your point, why Trio versus the actual FF? And in other cases, sometimes it kind of hits me the right way. A modern "FF like" homage in some regards, but not a pure photocopy by any means is the Terrifics:  The FF nods are charming, but it stands on its own in my mind, versus me thinking "this is just FF by another name". Another example that comes to mind for me is Dale Keown's Pitt, which has some obvious strong resemblance to the Hulk (and the two did crossover before!), but kind of has its own vibe as well. It was the "Hulk-like" semblance that may have attracted me initially, but held up on its own as well:  When I think of say Samaritan in Astro City as another example, I liked how Busiek went a little deeper on what it might really like to have Superman's powers (having Samaritan basically ALWAYS responding to emergencies for instance). In this case, starting with a photocopy on purpose, but then taking it in an interesting and innovative direction. I probably am most bothered by "photocopy storytelling" (i.e. highly derivative) than the character/teams designs themselves. But all that said, with many things in life, comics books, fast food, you name it, there are definitely situations where only the original will do sometimes! |
|
|
|
Post by james on May 9, 2022 17:34:39 GMT -5
I'm sure there are other creators that have phoned it in but Byrne definitely seems to be the most obvious choice. When I think about phoning it it no matter what the genre I put Byrne right there with Stephen King, James Patterson, and Dustin Hoffman and Robert Deniro over the last 15 years or so
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2022 17:51:36 GMT -5
I can say that Pitt does interest me. There’s always an exception!
On the general topic, sometimes it is perception, sometimes it is reality. Perhaps that SFC outlet would have provided fried chicken that was as nice as KFC. I don’t know, I didn’t try it. I do know that when I tried drinking Panda Cola, it did not taste anywhere near as good as Coca-Cola.
So I’m sure there are things I would enjoy. Perhaps Danger Unlimited would surprise me in a positive way. In other ways, as with Mac and Me, I couldn’t believe how blatant it was.
|
|
|
|
Post by badwolf on May 9, 2022 18:01:24 GMT -5
I think Black Hammer is a good example. Homages are one thing, but I was shocked at how on the nose these character swipes were. Everything from the main cast to the "ultimate evil" they defeated. Most of it from DC but there's a little Marvel in there too. (I couldn't figure out who the robot was supposed to be, though.)
|
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on May 9, 2022 18:55:59 GMT -5
I remember buying Danger Unlimited in 1994 and think it was just meh. Maybe that's the Start of Byrne losing his magic. He would do Wonder Woman about 2 years later and he definitely lost his mojo then. Photocopy heroes have been around certainly since the Squadron Supreme made it's debut in Avengers #85.
|
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on May 9, 2022 20:30:00 GMT -5
Next Men was pretty good, when I originally read it; haven't re-read it since its initial release. I also recall enjoying Danger Unlimited and loved the Torch of Liberty Special. Next Men was pretty much its own thing, though the name was an obvious marketing ploy. It didn't really read like an X-Men copy, though. Danger Unlimited was more direct and Torch of Liberty was a complete homage (though he was also woven into the backstory for Hellboy, while Byrne was scripting the initial story). Babe I recall being pretty forgettable.
Busiek, I always felt, was dealing more in the archetype, rather than the specific character. Samaritan is the superhuman, rather than a pure Superman homage (he's from the future, not another planet); Silver Agent is very Captain America, but not quite the same, the Confessor and Altar Boy are the Batman and Robin type, but not an actual copy. In every instance, he takes the type and plays around with it and adds a different dimension (Samaritan from the future, Silver Agent being disgraced, Confessor's true background, Crackerjack exposed as a failed actor/dancer (but being the wisecracking swashbuckler, ala Colan-era Daredevil), Quarrel being a legacy from a supervillain, rather than superhero, etc. The Junk Man was a Flash-style gimmick villain with a more rounded background and motivation.
Sometimes, a creator made a copy of their creation. Rich Buckler did Demon Hunter, at Atlas/Seaboard, then introduced Devilslayer, at Marvel, with pretty much the same backstory and mostly the same costume, apart from a color change. Howard Chaykin took the Scorpion, made him Jewish and stuck him on the West Coast and gave us Dominic Fortune. Similarly, he took Ironwolf and turned him into Cody Starbuck, who kind of turned into Reuben Flagg, if you squint, a little. I always thought that Chaykin should do an Eternal Champion story, with all of the heroes he did in his own likeness (he even reused names, like Erika Klein-Hernandez)
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2022 21:00:49 GMT -5
Busiek, I always felt, was dealing more in the archetype, rather than the specific character. Samaritan is the superhuman, rather than a pure Superman homage (he's from the future, not another planet); Silver Agent is very Captain America, but not quite the same, the Confessor and Altar Boy are the Batman and Robin type, but not an actual copy. In every instance, he takes the type and plays around with it and adds a different dimension (Samaritan from the future, Silver Agent being disgraced, Confessor's true background, Crackerjack exposed as a failed actor/dancer (but being the wisecracking swashbuckler, ala Colan-era Daredevil), Quarrel being a legacy from a supervillain, rather than superhero, etc. The Junk Man was a Flash-style gimmick villain with a more rounded background and motivation. Yes, but I would argue Busiek was very specific in his character references as the basis for those explorations. The First Family is absolutely the Fantastic Four, the small tweaks made to each of them similar to the other characters you mentioned I think was just to avoid too literal a copy which wasn't the point of what he was trying to achieve. But he also throws in enough "wink wink" reference just so you are clear, like Asa wearing glasses as part of his disguise when he is not Samaritan. The fact that he puts a little twist on future versus another planet still functionally accomplishes the same thing...he's an outsider in a larger sense. And I think that linkage was important to achieve what he set out to do. When you see what Samaritan goes through everyday, your mind keeps going back to "would Clark ultimately have to live this way to completely realize the full scope of his potential as a hero". If it was more just an archetype, I agree it could explore similar territory, but again, I think Busiek wanted us to know at all times the specific characters he was deconstructing. |
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on May 9, 2022 21:15:06 GMT -5
ps Re: Clue Club & Goober and the Ghostchasers et al.
You need a little context for Saturday morning tv, in the 70s. In the 60s, there had been a great mix of both comedic and adventure cartoons. The adventure stuff often had levels of violence comparable to prime time programming. By the end of the decade, this prompted self-appointed watchdog groups to harangue the networks and pressure government to censor children's programming for violence and educational content. One of their chief targets was Filmation's Adventures of Batman cartoons, where Batman and Robin engaged in actual fights with the villains and henchmen. They punched, kicked and threw objects at each other. So, the networks, trying to keep government off their backs, instituted mandates for educational content and restrictions on depicting violence. This made adventure cartoons garder to do and led to the initial Super Friends cartoon to focus more on environmental topics (which was topical, after the first Earth Day), for educational content, and few real villains, to reduce violence. They handled natural disasters and runaway vehicles, but not so much crooks (there are a few, sprinkled across the season). So, if you can't do adventure, double down on humor. Scooby Doo was a big hit, when it debuted, in 1969 and ran for two seasons of new episodes and longer with repeats. hana-Barbera (and Filmation) were quick to churn out more of something that was popular and they started doing more mystery programs, with groups of teenagers and a comedic animal or character. So, you get Goober and the ghostchasers, where the dog, Goober, turns invisible, when scared, or Clue Club, where you have two dogs, who talk to each other, while the humans are off elsewhere, or Funky Phantom, where a Revlutionary War ghost aids the teens, or Speed Buggy , where they have a talking dune buggy, or Jabberjaw, where Scooby Doo is a shark, who plays drums in a Josie and the Pussycats-like band (which H-B also animated). You get Butch cassidy and the Sundance Kids, which mixes the formula with Josie, as it has musical numbers. Scooby Doo was inspired by the success of The Archies, where musical numbers were a big part of the show, leading to Scooby Doo to ave the music, during chase scenes, with the supposed ghosts and monsters. These shows could be done without much direct violence, just scary monsters, to add danger, then the gang concocting a trap to catch them, which didn't require them to lay hands on them in a violent manner.
Quality varied. I think I only ever saw one Goober episode and Funky Phantom is pretty hazy, in my memory. Jabber Jaw was fine, for what it was, as was Speed Buggy. Clue Club had moments, but, the two dogs Woofer and Wimper, were about the only memorable element. The mysteries were pretty much cliches. Butch Cassidy was an interesting twist on the music adventure thing, as they are secret agents; but, the episodes have a sameness to them and Josie & the Pussycats had more personality (as did Jabberjaw).
H-B copied other shows of theirs, with the Jetsons largely being the Flintstones, in the future, with a similar dynamic, though the Flintstones were more directly a copy of the Honeymooners. The Jetsons ended up more of a family sitcom. The Banana Splits was recycled as the Cattanooga Cats and as The Skatebirds. The latter included a segment , Woofer and Wimper, which edited the Clue Club episodes down to just the dog segments. Filmation did similar things, reusing elements or models from one series in another, like Star Trek elements and staging reappearing in The Space Sentinels or the Hercules model being reused in The Freedom Force, on Tarzan & The Super 7. Filmation wasn't quite as bad as H-B, in terms of recycling whole shows; but, repeated lots of shots and music cues in their series, to save money on animation.
Like anything else in entertainment; if something is successful, everyone rushes out copies, including the people behind the initial success.
|
|
|
|
Post by Batflunkie on May 9, 2022 21:28:00 GMT -5
You know, I seem to recall seeing ads and photos of cartoons such as Goober and the Ghost Chasers and Clue Club. I’ve never seen them (and perhaps shouldn’t judge them), but as Shawn Michaels once said, perception is everything; when I did see ads, I just thought I was looking at something that *might* have been an inferior bandwagon copy of Scooby-Doo. Who knows, perhaps those were GREAT cartoons, but perception and bias can lead a person to not bother with something. That’s just one example. I think Fangface was probably my favorite Doo-Knock-Off |
|
|
|
Post by Duragizer on May 9, 2022 21:58:57 GMT -5
I'm sure there are other creators that have phoned it in but Byrne definitely seems to be the most obvious choice. Liefeld wept. |
|
