|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Sept 12, 2024 21:43:39 GMT -5
"Hate" is a fine description of my example. Geoff Johns is a creator whose work I generally dislike, but it used to be that once in a while I'd give him another chance. I stopped doing that after his first issue of Shazam. Johns and DC promoted it as a return to fun and innocence for the character (I don't remember if they exactly said "innocence", but if not, that's still a fair paraphrase). Two or three pages in, there was a reference to child molestation. One could argue that it was oblique - Billy called the wizard "Chester", which in context could only have meant "Chester the molester" - but what kind of sicko thinks that even an oblique reference belongs in a book promoted as innocent? And it's not like the one or two pages preceding that were free of Johns' usual... Johns-yness, so I'm not concerned that I'm denying myself any quality comics. This was even worse than the time Johns had Clark tell Jon that he won't let him meet Wonder Woman until he's 18. Yeah, it was obviously meant as a joke, but it's only funny if you hold some troglodyte view of relationships between the sexes. To me, Geoff Johns' work seemed to consist mostly of rehashing old 80s plots, from better writers. |
|
|
|
Post by jtrw2024 on Sept 13, 2024 4:09:47 GMT -5
Marvel made the smart move to retcon this story away a couple years back! Well, I really liked "Sins Past", so naturally I disagree. But it's a totally different timeline/continuity now than the one begun by Lee and Ditko in 1962 anyway. "One More Day", the deal with Mephisto and the resultant reboot saw to that. I actually liked Sins Past as well, and most of the JMS run. I just wasn't a fan of some of the changes or ways he interpreted characters and events, but still liked it overall. With Sins Past being retconned away, I find I can enjoy it even more. But you're right, any retcon after One More Day doesn't really mean as much as it used it |
|
|
|
Post by rich on Sept 13, 2024 5:19:39 GMT -5
One comic that young me kinda hated- when they removed Wolverine's adamantium. I'd just read Weapon X (brilliant brilliant comic) and they do this? He didn't need to have been born with them. They're too thin to have that massive chunk of jagged bone inside, surely? Anyway, that was a miserable era for X-Men. With mostly uninspiring writing (along with some poor writing) and useless editing, the books suffered for many many years. Personally I never much enjoyed the X-Men comics again after this period. They did not recover from the loss of Claremont and Lee months apart, and 90s excesses hurt the comics. X-Men might have been stronger remaining as a single monthly title.
Edit: I just checked and it was Nicieza who wrote the offending story, who could write some decent comics. I'd recalled it being Lobdell. Either way, it was probably the editors making the call.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Sept 13, 2024 6:23:03 GMT -5
I was really disappointed by a certain collection of The Authority (I forget the title). The art by Bryan Hitch was impressive, but the script by Warren Ellis combined cynical dialogue with a plot that was an excuse for self-indulgent violence porn. Maybe that's what the title was about, but Ellis' reputation led me to expect something far better. (It had a cloned army of flying superdudes who could be slaughtered without remorse, apparently, and a FunManchu-type bad guy who destroyed cities just for fun).
I didn't get beyond the original Transmetropolitan miniseries either. Spider Jerusalem struck me as the kind of self-appointed crusader who is ready to lie, steal, cheat and abuse anyone just so he can feel good about his self-righteous person. I know the character has many, many fans but I couldn't stand his personality. So yeah, I was disappointed.
|
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Sept 13, 2024 6:23:57 GMT -5
There's been many books that I bought and didn't buy the following one.
|
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Sept 13, 2024 6:51:14 GMT -5
No nose Feral Wolverine comes to mind... I was interested in the bone claws era but when they started making him a feral mess I was out.
The Crossing of course... that always needs to be mentioned whenever bad comics are discussed.
The other Iron Man plot that qualifies for me was when Tony was made Secretary of Defense (which was a fun change) but then they ended it by having someone take over the armor and assassinate a diplomat... such a silly an extreme way to change tack, and how does TONY STARK get hacked? makes no sense.
|
|
|
|
Post by driver1980 on Sept 13, 2024 6:51:35 GMT -5
I was really disappointed by a certain collection of The Authority (I forget the title). The art by Bryan Hitch was impressive, but the script by Warren Ellis combined cynical dialogue with a plot that was an excuse for self-indulgent violence porn. Maybe that's what the title was about, but Ellis' reputation led me to expect something far better. (It had a cloned army of flying superdudes who could be slaughtered without remorse, apparently, and a FunManchu-type bad guy who destroyed cities just for fun). I didn't get beyond the original Transmetropolitan miniseries either. Spider Jerusalem struck me as the kind of self-appointed crusader who is ready to lie, steal, cheat and abuse anyone just so he can feel good about his self-righteous person. I know character has many, many fans but I couldn't stand his personality. So yeah, I was disappointed. Ditto on the Transmetropolitan mini-series. |
|
|
|
Post by rich on Sept 13, 2024 7:18:59 GMT -5
I quite enjoyed Transmet, and probably read two thirds of it. I haven't looked back at it, or indeed any other Warren Ellis comic, in 20+ years. I'm curious how they've aged. Garth Ennis is still entertaining, but the vast majority of writers that popped up in the 90s are challenging to read now... (not in a positive way)
|
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Sept 13, 2024 10:24:32 GMT -5
I was really disappointed by a certain collection of The Authority (I forget the title). The art by Bryan Hitch was impressive, but the script by Warren Ellis combined cynical dialogue with a plot that was an excuse for self-indulgent violence porn. Maybe that's what the title was about, but Ellis' reputation led me to expect something far better. (It had a cloned army of flying superdudes who could be slaughtered without remorse, apparently, and a FunManchu-type bad guy who destroyed cities just for fun). I didn't get beyond the original Transmetropolitan miniseries either. Spider Jerusalem struck me as the kind of self-appointed crusader who is ready to lie, steal, cheat and abuse anyone just so he can feel good about his self-righteous person. I know character has many, many fans but I couldn't stand his personality. So yeah, I was disappointed. That would have been the initial story arc, when they were launched in their own title, after Stormwatch. Mark Millar's take, with the pastiches of The Avengers attacking them, was far worse, in terms of violence. I had more issues with vaguely defined powers that can do anything necessary, until they can't and then suddenly work again. I had similar problems in Planetary, but it is more in check, there, and hidden world or uncovered object was more central to the story. |
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Sept 13, 2024 11:32:59 GMT -5
Transmet is easily a top ten favorite comic of all time for me. Planetary is a top five.
To answer the question, I will say Superman: Earth One and Batman: Earth One. I luckily got both from the library. I only made it through about 1/4 way through either before I threw them down in disgust. I seriously considered tossing them and just taking the hit from the library for a lost book to spare anyone else the pain of trying to read them. But I was afraid the library would replace it and give those maggot-filled turds another sale.
|
|
|
|
Post by mikelmidnight on Sept 13, 2024 11:55:15 GMT -5
On the understanding that "hate" is too strong a term, I think the only thing I've read that really fits the OP's description was the Kurt Busiek and George Pérez Avengers/JLA crossover. I picked up all four issues in one go from my local comic shop in 2005 or so, and really had high hopes for it, as I'm a big Busiek fan. But by the time I had reached the second issue I knew that it was a turkey. It's just eye-rollingly bad. For one thing, I felt it lacked in the story department and some of the dialogue is excruciating -- definitely not Busiek's finest moment! I think part of the problem is that as a rule of thumb I find big superhero fights a bit boring, so I was probably hoping for a bit more intellectual meat to the narrative in order to hold my interest. Especially with this having been written by Busiek. The thing that got on my nerves the most though was all the fawning over the respective heroes' abilities, with Busiek seemingly desperate to avoid favouring one character over another. Too much of it read like, " Honestly Superman...you're the best!"; "Oh no, Spider-Man...really, you're the best!"; "Well, thanks a lot, Superman, but we all know that you're just the greatest." etc etc. Urrrghhh...give me a break! You could sense Busiek not wanting to tread on any toes or upset DC and Marvel editorial by favouring one company's heroes over the other. Myself, I found it all deeply irritating. Pérez's artwork was really nice to look at, but the writing came off as little more than a fanboy jerk-off session. I love Marvel superheroes a lot and I like a few DC ones too, but "never the twain shall meet" seems like a good rule to me. I knew it was going to be a turkey when Busiek, on social media, was asking fans what they would like to see. I wish we'd gotten the Roy Thomas/George Pérez story, with the Master of Time revealed as another Kang counterpart! What we got instead felt less like a story than a disjointed collected of scenes designed to satisfy everyone's inner fanboy. I didn't get beyond the original Transmetropolitan miniseries either. Spider Jerusalem struck me as the kind of self-appointed crusader who is ready to lie, steal, cheat and abuse anyone just so he can feel good about his self-righteous person. I know character has many, many fans but I couldn't stand his personality. So yeah, I was disappointed. Spider Jerusalem struck me as a wan Hunter S Thompson clone, designed to impress people who didn't know Hunter S Thompson. They also ripped off ideas from Paul Krassner, designed to impress people who didn't know Paul Krassner. |
|
|
|
Post by rich on Sept 13, 2024 12:03:26 GMT -5
JMS wrote that Superman book, right? I didn't get what all the fuss was about. Babylon 5 was boring so I didn't watch much of it, but comics fans raved about Rising Stars and Midnight Nation, but they were really boring, especially the latter. I tried the first few issues of his Spidey run, but again, boring. Credit where it's due, Sense8 was entertaining, if odd.
Did he ever write any genuinely good comics?
|
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Sept 13, 2024 12:04:30 GMT -5
I didn't get beyond the original Transmetropolitan miniseries either. Spider Jerusalem struck me as the kind of self-appointed crusader who is ready to lie, steal, cheat and abuse anyone just so he can feel good about his self-righteous person. I know character has many, many fans but I couldn't stand his personality. So yeah, I was disappointed. Spider Jerusalem struck me as a wan Hunter S Thompson clone, designed to impress people who didn't know Hunter S Thompson. They also ripped off ideas from Paul Krassner, designed to impress people who didn't know Paul Krassner. Jerusalem being a Thompson homage was the point. There was no hiding the ball at all. Transmet was all about transposing "New Journalism" in to a near future setting. Again, no real hiding the ball as to any influence of Thompson, Kesey or any others. If people didn't know where the influences were coming from that's hardly Ellis' fault. |
|
|
|
Post by driver1980 on Sept 13, 2024 12:06:24 GMT -5
I hated this well before I got to the final page:  |
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Sept 13, 2024 12:07:58 GMT -5
I hated this well before I got to the final page: I hate it just from the cover. |
|
