When I Liked Superheroes

[ctc]

So;

It's been said that your tastes in stuff like comcis is the result of the time period in which you discovered them. I tend to agree, since when you debate the merits and drawbacks of different books there seems to be distinct trends. You'll hear older folks talking about how the CURRENT books are horrible, and there's no plot, and no draftsmanship, and they just don't get how THAT character should be written.... Just as you'll hear the young whippersnappers talk about how the old books were hackneyed, with stilted dialogue and two dimensional characters. And don't GET me started on the "art"....

So I'm looking to establish a sort of baseline; and see where everybody's at. (Mostly for the sake of future debates.) I'm hoping poeple will respond with their view, and I'm hoping those that do will explain their position. Too often the majority of a person's explanations is "understood." That is, the person offering it KNOWS they're right, and never quite explains to those of us who DON'T see things their way. (It's not a shot, people IN GENERAL are really bad at thinking through a different perspective.)

When I was a kid I didn't like superheroes. I read a lot of comics; mostly undergrounds (from my aunts and uncles,) MAD magazine, LOTS of European books, the Warren mags, Heavy metal.... It wasn't until University that I read any Marvel and Dc stuff, and that was 'cos I worked in a comic shop. So I feel lucky to have more of an overview of the whole mainstream comic thing. And I found:

-For DC books, my favourite time was the 60's. It was an era when ANYTHING could happen. Batman could fight intelligent dinosaurs from Saturn that had a ray which turned people into tiny gorillas.... and NOBODY would question this! Complete, unfettered imagination. There was a good variety of sotry too; serious, funny, weird....

-For Marvel I like the late 60's/early 70's. They still had a perchant for the weird, but Marvel was trying for a more.... plausible (given the setting) kind of story. So you had continuing plots, more characterization, but still that "what the hell?!?!?" approach to comics. Once you've comitted to doing a superhero comic the gloves are off: if being atom-bombed gives you muscles in the setting you've got a free hand for durned near anything. By the early 70's Marvel seems to have been toying with the idea of comics for an older crowd; something you could REALLY see in their horror comics.

-I think by the late 70's both companies were losing it. Superheroes had another upswing, but it seems to have been mostly in the realm of marketing, and that seems to have been aimed mostly at kids. So there was a sort of softening of the comics. Not neccessarily a dumbing down, but they definitely steered away from some of the stories they had been doing.

-Ironicly, most people I know saw the 80's as a boom period; but I think for Marvel and DC they were the beginning of the end. Both companies were going for a more "mature" audience with a lot of their books, and trying to make them more relevant to the times.... but I think by doing so they lost a lot of the imagination of the earlier comics. They seem to have developed a lot of self-consciousness over their material, and anything that even remotely smacked of "camp" was shunned. It seemed like this was the advent of the speculator as well....

-....and by the 90's the speculator was king. So we got "event" comics, multiple covers, "designer" comics (where fans would buy a book specificly 'cos a 'hot' artist was working on it. Writers didn't seem to matter too much at that time) and people hoarding books. For the superheroes there was also a sharp decline in the imagination levels of most of the books. Everyone had the same powers, everyone had simialr backgrounds, and most of the bad guys' plots were "find this guy and beat him up!" Eventually the spectators moved on, and the fans who were actually READING the books got shafted 'cos the companies would change them around every few months to better conform with whatever the current trend was.

-Which led to the 00's "non event" books. Declining sales as potential new fans (IE: kids) moved away from superhero books to Japanese and European comics. Although on the upside, the last few years have seen a few mainstream crews actually producing comics meant to be read. And when those kids reading the Japanese books grow up they're gonna make books of their own. Books that'll have plots, and characters, and consequence just like the comics they loved when they were kids. ('Course they'll all have big eyes and tons of speed lines too.)

So.... howzabout you folks?

Don C.

[goldenryan]

cannot say i'm as big of comic fan as most guys are.
i enjoy reading the early 60's marvel books because it introduces lot of the principal characters which are still around and stan lee humor makes the books enjoyable too. the comic artwork from the 60's kirby,steranko,adams is second to none.
i'm not a fan of modern comics. it's almost like how pro wrestling was in the mid to late 90's it was an amazing period for any fan but wrestling now doesn't have the same following it had back then. comics are the same way it will always have fans but will not have the cultural impact as it did back then.

[The Bat]

Well...I'm almost 44...and I've been reading Comics since I could read. So, I have MUCH love for the old Comics...but let's face facts...in the "good old Days", Doc Doom would say things like..."it was you who sought to destroy Me...but in the end, it is I who will destroy you"!

So Yeah...I like the more "Adult" writing of Comics today(though not always...it of course depends on the Writer). Naturally...we as Human beings HATE change, and want things to remain the same. But if Comics hadn't evolved...I wouldn't still be reading them.

[BlackKnight]

Some of the Artists are Just plain Better today imo .
I love big high gloss colored pieces of art work incorperated in by books.
Story telling (for the most part) is better,.. or atleast with the books I read.
Chicks are Drawn like Porn Stars.

I dunno,.. I like books today very much,.. I can personally barely make it threw something from the 60's. But I never started reading Comics till the 80's.

[Werewolf]

Chicks are Drawn like Porn Stars.

I personally think female characters were drawn, prettier, sexier and more realistic in the 70s.

To modern comic artists, there is nothing wrong with full breasts on female characters and it's certainly nothing new in comics. But there is this thing called "gravity" that modern artist tend to forget about. Large breasts are effected by this "gravity." They do not jut straight out of the body and ride high on a woman's rib cage. So, no, breasts do not start directly below the collar bone and jut straight out.

Also women with full breasts tend not to look like skinny 12 year old girls with waists so ridiculously small they wouldn't even have room to hold their internal organs. Women also do not have continually arched backs and cannot actually contort their spines around into the position where you can see their breasts and butts like that at the same time.

I have to wonder if many of them have actually even seen a real flesh and blood woman.

Rant over.

[madmarva]

Really, I appreciate comics from all eras. They are certainly better written today than at any point dating back to the Golden Age, and overall, the art might be better, but you can point to great art in every period

I'd argue that Jack Burnley and Mac Rayboy from the Golden Age and Gil Kane and Jack Kirby and Joe Kubert of the Silver Age are better than practically anyone working today. You could say the same about Neal Adams, Bernie Wrightson and Barry Smith of the Bronze Age. I also forgot the fantastic albeit stylistic art from the EC books of the 1950s.

To me, comics suffer today from expansionist desings. Since Spider-Man expanded to 4 or more titles in the 1980s and the X-Men exploded with umpteen titles in the 1990s, the idea has been to stretch the concepts as far as possible.

Not every character to that gets a guest-starring role in Batman is worth a mini series or a one shot. The Battle for the Cowl one shots and minis are ridiculous. Most have little at all to do with Batman.

Also, while I enjoy continuity, it is crippling to books to be forced to reflect ongoing continuity all the time and making it a focal point of the book. DC started Justice League over but the book has been kneecapped by having to play along with events.

A book like Justice League should be a monthly event in and of itself. It should be the lead dog not the tail that's getting wagged.

Continuity is great when its the springboard for great stories like much of what Geoff Johns and Peter Tomasi have done with the two Green Lantern books, but in many cases its an anchor to creativity and good stories.

What's more important interesting stories or continuity lining up in lockstep?

It does not bother me one whit if Superman appears in a Justice League story at the same time World of Krypton story line is going on, particularly if both stories are good.

As long as the creators remain true to the established spirit of the characters everything is cool to me.

It's a shame for a talent like Dewayne McDuffie to be caged or backed into corners just to make his book line up with the storylines in the Big 3's books.

Justice League doesn't have to have Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman to tell great stories, but I would argue having those characters in the book as well as one of the Green Lanterns, Flash (either Wally or Barry) and Aquaman is important because since its inception the Justice League has served as a gateway book to the DC Universe. The same can be argued about the Avengers in the Marvel Universe.

It's a way to get a little bit of all the characters for one price, which could lead the reader to seek out the other characters' solo titles.

If the JLA is strong, you have a stronger DC. Same with the Avengers and Marvel.

[johnnystorm]

I agree about the event driven series ruining today's comics. I'm a fan of all era's of comics, probably more so 1970s on back, but there's a little bit in every era to like. But I think that most series now are hamstrung by the crossover event which is company mandated. Sure they sell, but they almost have too by definition, as they usually encompass every title a company puts out. If you read only Batman, you at some point have to buy the event comics.
Secondly, the story arc has fostered an atmosphere in which creators are only in it for the short run. They're sole investment in the medium is 6 to 12 issues, unlike past creators who did comics as a career. There's no feeling of stewardship in the character, simply people who want to play with a character and move on to something else. In the past, a grouping or family of titles fell under the auspices of a single editor who maintained that line. Today you no longer have this form of ownership, which allows numerous people access to a character, and a lot of times the left hand is ignorant of the right. For all some folks complain about continuity, in order for any medium to work you have to follow some continuity. Whether it's 24 or Lost on TV, Star Wars or James Bond in the movies, or Spider-Man & Batman in comics, without at least short-term continuity (and by short-term I mean at least 5 years, or the duration of a TV series or movie franchise) the inconsistencies play havoc with the reader's ability to enjoy the medium. Should reader's be expected to know what happened in a book 50 years ago and maintain that as canon. No, I don't expect that. I personally find that trivia enjoyable, as do many others. But I think it's expected that someone today investing time & money in a comic series should at least be offered consistency within that series or company's series. That's why I think you see such vocal outbursts against series like Final Crisis, 52, & Countdown at DC- the coherant consistencies are not there, mostly due to lack of editorial stewardship. Marvel has the event driven stories as well, but there seems to be an across the line cohesion to the event. DC books just do whatever, then backpedal to fix errors caused by the whims of upper level management- or just outright ignore them.

Obviously, continuity has never been a consistent factor in comics. It certainly wasn't at DC in the Silver Age- Batman & co-stars in Brave & the Bold weren't the same characters that were appearing in their regular series. And no one really seemed to mind back then as long as the stories were good. When Marvel came along with the Marvel Universe of interrelated characters, then continuity bacame a major factor. Now it was important to make sure that what happened in Iron Man was consistent with what happened in the Avengers. Sure it was easier when only one or two people were producing most of the companies books. But it was important to fans & readers, and was the KEY factor in Marvel becoming a bigger company than DC.

[HardyGirl]

As a kid, my exposure to comics was very limited. I read the Sunday funnies, and owned the 3 Caspers, a Little Lulu, the first Batman (replica), and 3 Looney Tunes comics. In the dentist's office I read Archies. My exposure to Superheroes was the 60s Batman, 60s Spider-man, SuperFriends, 60's & 70s Filmation Batman, George Reeves Superman, Lynda Carter's Wonder Woman, and Bill Bixby's Incredible Hulk. At school, when the boys at my table would talk about comics, I tried to talk about Batman, and was teased for liking DC. That was the first time I knew there was a difference between Marvel and DC. I do have a few Superhero comics today, but I do prefer Star Trek and Archies.

[Gorn Captain]

but let's face facts...in the "good old Days", Doc Doom would say things like..."it was you who sought to destroy Me...but in the end, it is I who will destroy you"!

Hey, I say that all the time in real life!

[Gorn Captain]

I love progress as much as the next guy, but to me, "more is better" doesn't work too well. If stories and panels are so "full" that you can hardly follow anymore, and a cross-over involves nine titles (six of which I don't subscribe to), it's just too much.

I can hardly follow anymore how many times some characters have died/been resurrected/died again. All women have six foot long legs and Pamela Anderson boobs. All men look like bodybuilders.
I'm expecting that The Blob will soon get an extreme make-over and look toned and tanned.

I've canceled most of my titles (just Uncanny X-Men and Avengers are left), and that's OK. I leave the future to the new readers. Gives me time to get some back issues!

"Doom will now kick back and relax with issue 171 of X-Men. And a cup of hot Latverian cocoa...."

[Werewolf]

All men look like bodybuilders.

That's a good point.

Besides the inhuman caricatures they make of the female form, the men are getting just too damn huge. When characters like Batman and Superman are starting to look like the Incredible Hulk in spandex, it's time to tone it down. They need to start drawing actual humans again. Base male characters, like Batman, on gymnasts and martial artists and not some bloated vein popping steroid nightmare.

Comic artists might be technically putting more detail in their work now but they sure as hell aren't drawing any better in my opinion.

Now one my favorite classic comic artists is Gold Key Flash Gordon artist Al Williamson. Now that guy could draw. Beautiful women, realistic men and detailed ships and environments.

[BlackKnight]

I think the Statement of saying all men look like Body Builders is Clearly a statement of Not really getting out there & Reading all what is offered, & is a Statement outta Ignorance.

I mean no disrespect in saying so,.. this is just my Opinion.

With the Books I read (today) & Mind you,.. I don't read everything,.. But most artists have a very well balance of characterization with their respective figure Drawing. Not every character is the Same Size,.. Same Shape or even look like a Body Builder. It is Clearly on Who is drawing the Book. If there is a Bunch of Super Hero's Running around in a Book,.. You would rather these Super Hero's WHO Mind you are Suppost to be "Super" Be Drawn with Beer Guts, No Muscles, & Look like some Every Day Joe that Works at Walmart or sits in a Chair typing nonsense on a Message Forum.., I dunno what to say,.. Given I couldn't possibly imagine a character like that Fighting Crime & Saving the Day. If you look at some of the Best Atheletes Today, they have serious Muscle , they are cut, Ripped & have little or No Body Fat.

IMO,.. if super hero's were out there,.. thats what they would look like.

From what I've scene from threads like this over the last few yrs,.. whenever one is started or one is commented in,.. most the comments generate from a persons views who are a narrow minded person, set in the past of what they were into when they were a child, & nothing else matters in their mind. Which is fine,.. not opening to change , new ideas & sitting back in a seat like my 67 yr old GrandMa did before she pasted away, saying everything New Sucks always reminds me of those 2 guys on the Muppets.

If someone doesn't like New stuff,.. or Evolution of something,.. thats Fine,.. But imo, lets face some Reality . The Reality is , you like the stuff based upon when you were a Child, nothing else will ever be greater than the imagination of a Child,.. but that doesn't mean that all New Stuff Sucks,.. & all stuff from the past was Greater either.

Just my thoughts.

[kingdom warrior]

If you look at some of the Best Atheletes Today, they have serious Muscle , they are cut, Ripped & have little or No Body Fat.

Babe Ruth for most of his career was a Fat beer guzzling hot dog eating cigar chomping Womanizer who put up ridiculous numbers without steroid use. Hank Aaron was a lean Power hitter who put up consistently great numbers to break the Babe's record neither of these men lifted weights or were diesel.

Sure you're not going to give Superman a gut but he shouldn't look like a Bodybuilder either. He should look muscled not bodybuilder ripped.

[BlackKnight]

Babe Ruth for most of his career was a Fat beer guzzling hot dog eating cigar chomping Womanizer who put up ridiculous numbers without steroid use. Hank Aaron was a lean Power hitter who put up consistently great numbers to break the Babe's record neither of these men lifted weights or were diesel.

Baseball's not a Sport Bro.
Seriously, what age did Ruth Die ,.. again ?
& Thats why We do Have characters like Bouncing Boy & The Blob.

Sure you're not going to give Superman a gut but he shouldn't look like a Bodybuilder either. He should look muscled not bodybuilder ripped.

Not every Artist Draws Supes like he's ripped on some Roid Fest.
Look at Ross's Pic at the Top,.. Go read some Gary Frank or Quintley Superman Stuff.... Just to name a few.

[kingdom warrior]

Baseball's not a Sport Bro.
Seriously, what age did Ruth Die ,.. again ?
& Thats why We do Have characters like Bouncing Boy & The Blob.



Not every Artist Draws Supes like he's ripped on some Roid Fest.
Look at Ross's Pic at the Top,.. Go read some Gary Frank or Quintley Superman Stuff.... Just to name a few.

LOL!
I have no comeback hahahahah