Superman Through the Ages! Forum

Superman Comic Books! => Superman! => Topic started by: Super Monkey on February 15, 2007, 07:23:40 PM



Title: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Super Monkey on February 15, 2007, 07:23:40 PM
New Geoff Johns interview on how and why it happen:
http://forum.newsarama.com/showthread.php?t=101595

Included is a pretty nifty looking Superman on a upcoming cover. I still don't like Zombie Bizarro however. But at least he change it to say:

"Think Dawn of the Dead meets Roger Rabbit on a square planet"

So, I guess we shall see what becomes of it.



Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Kuuga on February 16, 2007, 12:01:24 AM
He's prolly gonna have Bizzaro's eating people.


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Uncle Mxy on February 16, 2007, 07:01:29 AM
He's prolly gonna have Bizzaro's eating people.
That would be Soylent Blue, because only Superman is vulnerable to Soylent Green.  :)


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Permanus on February 16, 2007, 08:14:19 AM
Quote
GJ: Three ridiculous and horrifying issues. Think Dawn of the Dead meets Roger Rabbit on a square planet. And if that doesnít make you want to read the story check out Ericís cover.


It's not square, it's cubic! If the world were square, people would fall off it!
   


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Michel Weisnor on February 16, 2007, 08:21:40 AM
He's prolly gonna have Bizzaro's eating people.

I wouldn't put it past him.

Seriously, someone needs to pull him aside and tell Johns to tone it down. In Justice Society of America #3, a mother and daughter were splattered "Kid Miracleman" style. Now, I would expect this form of violence in other comics but not in Justice Society. I thought the same in Action Comics when Bizarro broke a young boy's arm. It's not necessary to show such excessive violence.  


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: JulianPerez on February 16, 2007, 02:06:08 PM
Let me make a prediction right here: in 20 years, nobody will remember Morrison's ALL-STAR SUPERMAN at all, but people will still be talking about Johns's ACTION and Busiek's SUPERMAN.

This is what you're saying:

New Geoff Johns interview on how and why it happen:
http://forum.newsarama.com/showthread.php?t=101595

Included is a pretty nifty looking Superman on a upcoming cover. I still don't like Zombie Bizarro however.

Quote from: Kuuga
He's prolly gonna have Bizzaro's eating people.

This, on the other hand, is all I'm hearing:

(http://www-uxsup.csx.cam.ac.uk/~fanf2/hermes/doc/talks/2004-02-ukuug/crybaby.png)

Quote from: SuperMonkey
"Think Dawn of the Dead meets Roger Rabbit on a square planet"

Now here's one place where we agree. MUST Geoff Johns use the Bizarro World, easily the most annoying and unfunny element of the Pre-Crisis mythos? It was cute to see a square earth as an easter egg in INFINITE CRISIS, but this is going too far.

I have faith, however, because of Johns's mindblowing talent, that he can turn it around and do something really cockeyed and strange. If anybody can do it, Johns can. I mean, this is the guy that in the pages of JSA took Ma Hunkel and played her straight, making her a wise, matronly character that the other JSA females confide in as a mother figure, a cross between Mrs. Cleaver and Guinan from TNG.

I just got finished rereading Geoff Johns's General Zod story arc, and I was impressed at how well he was able to build his story up with gradual revalations. There was always something strange every few pages. One thing I can say is that Johns is not predictable; the revalation on the last page of General Zod took me totally off guard, and he's great at posing questions that make you jumpy to know the answer to.

The thing I found most interesting about Johns's ACTION COMICS so far is how he alternates between Superman as a person with very human paternal instincts and a desire for companionship, and a heroic, can-do classic Superman. In other words, Johns toggles between Superman as a very lonely person, and Superman as an action hero like the Lone Ranger or Tarzan.

I just got around to reading the first issue of Johns's return to JSA from a couple months ago, and my God, does it ever start out strong. As great as I found Paul Levitz's JSA story arc with the Earth-2 heroes vs. the Gentleman Ghost, the traditional JSA characters and long-term story arcs you read the book for were absent. It didn't "feel" like JSA, strangely enough. I read the book for Sand's problems, the turmoil of Atom-Smasher, Black Adam's gradual heroic turn, and the incredible, doesn't-take-crap Wildcat, who took out the entire Injustice Gang by himself on a motorcycle (wow!). The "caper" tales of Levitz were fun, but I want to know what the gang's up to.

In his JSA, Johns delivers. In ONE PAGE, we know everything we need to know about who Ma Hunkel's grand-daughter is, which is a great act of characterization, even down to the "Defying Gravity" lyrics she was humming. It takes a lot of skill to make something as ordinary in superhero comics as flying feel extraordinary, but that moment when she was pushed off and flew instead of fell was triumphant. If it was a movie theater, people would have cheered.

To say nothing of the cliffhanger ending. BAM! Mr. America falls in through a glass window. If that wasn't enough, there were the weird little panel snippets at the end to make me crazy to know what's going on.


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Kuuga on February 16, 2007, 04:23:14 PM
Cute. Glad to know that you can save and post images, Julian. But lets leave your photo-album out of this.

Not everybody is gonna worship the ground Johns walks on or think he's brilliant for littering it with blood, bodyparts and corpses in a mainstream DC superhero comic.



Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Michel Weisnor on February 16, 2007, 05:04:29 PM

Let me make a prediction right here: in 20 years, nobody will remember Morrison's ALL-STAR SUPERMAN at all, but people will still be talking about Johns's ACTION and Busiek's SUPERMAN.

Now here's one place where we agree. MUST Geoff Johns use the Bizarro World, easily the most annoying and unfunny element of the Pre-Crisis mythos? It was cute to see a square earth as an easter egg in INFINITE CRISIS, but this is going too far.

I have faith, however, because of Johns's mindblowing talent, that he can turn it around and do something really cockeyed and strange. If anybody can do it, Johns can. I mean, this is the guy that in the pages of JSA took Ma Hunkel and played her straight, making her a wise, matronly character that the other JSA females confide in as a mother figure, a cross between Mrs. Cleaver and Guinan from TNG.

I just got finished rereading Geoff Johns's General Zod story arc, and I was impressed at how well he was able to build his story up with gradual revalations. There was always something strange every few pages. One thing I can say is that Johns is not predictable; the revalation on the last page of General Zod took me totally off guard, and he's great at posing questions that make you jumpy to know the answer to.

The thing I found most interesting about Johns's ACTION COMICS so far is how he alternates between Superman as a person with very human paternal instincts and a desire for companionship, and a heroic, can-do classic Superman. In other words, Johns toggles between Superman as a very lonely person, and Superman as an action hero like the Lone Ranger or Tarzan.

I just got around to reading the first issue of Johns's return to JSA from a couple months ago, and my God, does it ever start out strong. As great as I found Paul Levitz's JSA story arc with the Earth-2 heroes vs. the Gentleman Ghost, the traditional JSA characters and long-term story arcs you read the book for were absent. It didn't "feel" like JSA, strangely enough. I read the book for Sand's problems, the turmoil of Atom-Smasher, Black Adam's gradual heroic turn, and the incredible, doesn't-take-crap Wildcat, who took out the entire Injustice Gang by himself on a motorcycle (wow!). The "caper" tales of Levitz were fun, but I want to know what the gang's up to.

In his JSA, Johns delivers. In ONE PAGE, we know everything we need to know about who Ma Hunkel's grand-daughter is, which is a great act of characterization, even down to the "Defying Gravity" lyrics she was humming. It takes a lot of skill to make something as ordinary in superhero comics as flying feel extraordinary, but that moment when she was pushed off and flew instead of fell was triumphant. If it was a movie theater, people would have cheered.

To say nothing of the cliffhanger ending. BAM! Mr. America falls in through a glass window. If that wasn't enough, there were the weird little panel snippets at the end to make me crazy to know what's going on.

Don't get me wrong Julian. I agree, Geoff Johns is a very good writer. He's really been able to make Justice Society of America a thrilling book. Plus, his complete volume of high profile work speaks for itself. My problem with Geoff Johns isn't his characterizations or plots but the gratuitous amount of violence in almost every series he's written. Most of the time, it isn't necessary and ultimately reflects poorly on his writings. I sound like a broken record but it's cheap...         


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: jamespup on February 16, 2007, 08:41:05 PM
I sure as hell don't feel right buying them for my little nephews, that's for sure !


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Super Monkey on February 16, 2007, 08:52:35 PM
Making them Zombies is just really stupid idea much like the Byrne version, why you say, because it goes against everything that the character is suppose to be. Jerry Siegel's version was the best.


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: jamespup on February 16, 2007, 09:10:24 PM
Wow, my "heck" turned into "Heck"


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Super Monkey on February 16, 2007, 10:06:51 PM
What Don Heck?


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: jamespup on February 16, 2007, 10:56:59 PM
Don Heck was pretty darn good, but I was speaking more along the lines of Heckstorm


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Super Monkey on February 16, 2007, 11:21:54 PM
You mean Son of Saturday?

http://www.mvstamps.com/marvelspotlight13.htm


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: jamespup on February 16, 2007, 11:38:42 PM
Yup, that's the one !  actually, the new MAX one.

Better to rule in Heck than serve in 7-Eleven


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Super Monkey on February 17, 2007, 12:02:58 AM
And what I should be, all but less than he
Whom Shazam hath made greater?



Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: DBN on February 17, 2007, 03:17:24 AM
Making them Zombies is just really stupid idea much like the Byrne version, why you say, because it goes against everything that the character is suppose to be. Jerry Siegel's version was the best.

Why? The Byrne Bizarro was one of the better revisions. Quite a tragic character, come to think of it. Imperfect duplicate created by Luthor to be a weapon that ends up sacrificing its artificial life to restore Lucy Lane's sight.


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: jamespup on February 17, 2007, 04:06:12 AM
Always great fun to quote from Parallax Lost !


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Super Monkey on February 17, 2007, 12:49:28 PM
Making them Zombies is just really stupid idea much like the Byrne version, why you say, because it goes against everything that the character is suppose to be. Jerry Siegel's version was the best.

Why? The Byrne Bizarro was one of the better revisions. Quite a tragic character, come to think of it. Imperfect duplicate created by Luthor to be a weapon that ends up sacrificing its artificial life to restore Lucy Lane's sight.

What does that have to do with Bizarros?

What's next a serious take on Bat-Mite? Forbush-Man?


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: DBN on February 17, 2007, 06:06:14 PM
Making them Zombies is just really stupid idea much like the Byrne version, why you say, because it goes against everything that the character is suppose to be. Jerry Siegel's version was the best.

Why? The Byrne Bizarro was one of the better revisions. Quite a tragic character, come to think of it. Imperfect duplicate created by Luthor to be a weapon that ends up sacrificing its artificial life to restore Lucy Lane's sight.

What does that have to do with Bizarros?

What's next a serious take on Bat-Mite? Forbush-Man?

Why don't you ask Alan Moore, he was the one who turned Bizarro into a genocidal maniac and Mxy into a manipulating murderer.

Say what you will about the Byrne (and later) Bizarro(s), but atleast they never killed anyone. Unlike, Moore's, Loeb's, and Geoff Johns' versions.


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Great Rao on February 17, 2007, 06:56:37 PM
Byrne Bizarro was one of the better revisions. Quite a tragic character, come to think of it. Imperfect duplicate created by Luthor to be a weapon that ends up sacrificing its artificial life to restore Lucy Lane's sight.

If I recall correctly, the very first Bizarro story, which introduced the character and appeared in an issue of Superboy, involved a similar sort of pathos.  I don't recall the details though.

Regardless, I agree that given Geoff Johns' track record - and his comments about his upcoming story - he'll make even the Byrne Bizarro look like Mr. Rogers in comparison.


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: TELLE on February 17, 2007, 07:16:08 PM
The Byrne Bizarro is just a rehash of the first Siegel Superboy story, with one or two new additions --the original was full of pathos and all the more impressive as it was written in the 1950s and was essentially a children's story (not to mention, the complexity of any work of art that involves Siegel, Superboy, and a copy of Superboy --a sort of metacommentary on the experience of Siegel losing control of his own   creation --Siegel was the Mary Shelley of kid's comics).

 


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Super Monkey on February 17, 2007, 07:42:38 PM
the Superboy Bizarro appeared once, he is no more the true version as is the 30's Superman who killed is the true version of Superman. It is no excuse to have Superman start killing villains now, same with Bizarro.

Bizarro is and should be a gag funny comedy character, that is the version which is the true version. If people didn't love that version we wouldn't keep coming up with wacky Bizarro versions of people and things. Try it, it's fun and that's the whole point.

If you don't want funny Superman story, then create a new monster and make it tragic rather than trying to make a comedy character something which it is not suppose to be.

Why must every revision led to ultra-violent versions of nonviolent characters?

That only worked ONCE, with Marvelman, then never again. Yet, people will always try to recreate and capture that magic, but they never will. There will never be another Watchmen, or DKR, so please just give it up. Not even Frank Miller could do another DKR and make it as good as the 1st. Why does everyone else think they could?

For the record, the treatment of Bizarro in that Alan Moore story was something that I didn't like, but at least it wasn't suppose to be canon. See even Alan Moore himself couldn't do it! LOL.







Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Kuuga on February 17, 2007, 08:13:23 PM
the Superboy Bizarro appeared once, he is no more the true version as is the 30's Superman who killed is the true version of Superman. It is no excuse to have Superman start killing villains now, same with Bizarro.

Bizarro is and should be a gag funny comedy character, that is the version which is the true version. If people didn't love that version we wouldn't keep coming up with wacky Bizarro versions of people and things. Try it, it's fun and that's the whole point.

If you don't want funny Superman story, then create a new monster and make it tragic rather than trying to make a comedy character something which it is not suppose to be.

Why must every revision led to ultra-violent versions of nonviolent characters?

I know I evoke the animated series alot. I do. ..but this another one of those ideas where I thought their take was a perfect compromise. The character is still comedic, he's even very sympathetic but there is still tension since you basically have in him what happens when Supermans powers don't have a properly developed intellect to guide them. He could be funny *and* dangerous but without going to silly or horrifically graphic extremes.


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: DBN on February 17, 2007, 10:49:14 PM
the Superboy Bizarro appeared once, he is no more the true version as is the 30's Superman who killed is the true version of Superman. It is no excuse to have Superman start killing villains now, same with Bizarro.

Bizarro is and should be a gag funny comedy character, that is the version which is the true version. If people didn't love that version we wouldn't keep coming up with wacky Bizarro versions of people and things. Try it, it's fun and that's the whole point.

If you don't want funny Superman story, then create a new monster and make it tragic rather than trying to make a comedy character something which it is not suppose to be.

Why must every revision led to ultra-violent versions of nonviolent characters?

That only worked ONCE, with Marvelman, then never again. Yet, people will always try to recreate and capture that magic, but they never will. There will never be another Watchmen, or DKR, so please just give it up. Not even Frank Miller could do another DKR and make it as good as the 1st. Why does everyone else think they could?

For the record, the treatment of Bizarro in that Alan Moore story was something that I didn't like, but at least it wasn't suppose to be canon. See even Alan Moore himself couldn't do it! LOL.

Man, the first Bizarro #1 story wasn't a comedy. It was (in a sense) a lighter version of Frankenstein with a happy ending. Despite the fact that the story had a happy resolution, it does not change the fact that Bizarro was a tragic character. The character realizes that he shouldn't exist and acknowledges that he doesn't know right from wrong. Even with that, he tries to be like Superman and the people of Earth try to kill him simply because of his appearance. The character then goes on to try and end his existance because of the danger he poses. He fails, spots Lois in a helicopter, and falls in love with her. That love leads him to kidnap Lois who then rejects him. He then steals the duplicator ray to create a handsome version of himself that Lois can love. He then attempts to murder Superman for trying to interfere with his plan.

When Lois figures out that "Superman" is just another duplicate, Bizarro comes clean and his own creation insults him. The two fight a hopeless battle until Bizarro destroys the kryptonite (that he tried to use to kill Superman) to get Kal's help against new Bizarro. Unfortunatly, new Bizarro is killed by a cloud of kryptonite dust that resulted from the k-meteor Bizarro destroyed.

The delusional creature then decides that Lois secretly loves her and brings her a flower from Pluto that nearly hurts her. (Thankfully, Superman made the quick save.) He goes on to stalk her by adopting the indentity of Clark Kent. Luckely, Kal uses his heat vision to destroy Bizarro's disguise before he can compromise his secret identity. Bizarro kidnaps Lois once again bringing her back to the same island. Kal follows and another pointless fight begins. Lois ends the insanity by creating Bizarro-Lois and the two leave Earth together.

How is that comedy?


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: DBN on February 17, 2007, 11:03:43 PM
Continued:

The Byrne and later Jurgens take on the character closely followed that story (without the happy ending). Neither one killed anybody and actually ended up being quite noble.

Compare that with the Johns take on the character that kills and injures children or Loeb's Batzarro who murdered a couple to investigate their murder.


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Super Monkey on February 18, 2007, 12:03:24 AM
Ok, then what happen in the very next issue? What about every single appearance after that from 1959 to 1986?





Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Great Rao on February 18, 2007, 12:15:33 AM
I really don't understand what this argument is about.  It sounds like you both agree on the problems with Geoff Johns' Bizarro.


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Super Monkey on February 18, 2007, 01:18:10 AM
He is trying to defend Byrne's version, no sane person would try to defend Geoff John's Bizarro.

Bryne's Bizarro isn't really a true Bizarro, no more than his Superman is.

Not that it matters that version doesn't exist anymore.

I need to stop wasting my time writing about comics that I don't care about (Iron Age Superman).



Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: jamespup on February 18, 2007, 11:13:10 AM
John's is a Bizarro Bizarro


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: DBN on February 18, 2007, 01:17:24 PM
Ok, then what happen in the very next issue? What about every single appearance after that from 1959 to 1986?

The Bizarro World story? It was mainly a comedy, but still had serious plot points. The Bizarros locked up some of their fellow Bizarros for having non-deformed minds (which was never resolved) and wanted to turn Superman into a Bizarro for simply not knowing their laws.

What about the son of Bizarro trilogy? Humerous elements with Bizarro's son on Earth, but still not a straight up gag reel.


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: JulianPerez on February 19, 2007, 06:12:50 AM
There have been bad versions of Superman, but there's never been a version that is entirely devoid of at least one good idea.

The Byrne/Kesel/Wolfman reboot in the middle 1980s had its flaws, certainly, but it had two good ideas: their treatment of Bizarro, and their treatment of Lori Lemaris.

Lori Lemaris, in many ways, is much more unique and has much more to do if she's dead. Alive, Lori's the Superman-girlfriend equivalent of Timothy Dalton: an also-ran James Bond that is nobody's favorite.

Does anyone seriously want Superman to get together with Lori? Anyone at all?

But if Lori died - and if she died tragically - she becomes transformed into a very powerful, emotional figure: she becomes Superman's tragic love.

I also like the fact that Byrne and Kesel incorporated Aquaman into the Lori Lemaris story. Previously, having two contradictory versions of Atlantis was one of the most thickheaded acts of idiocy ever perpetrated by Weisenger's jealous and arrogant editorial Iron Fist.

Granted, Byrne, Helfer, and Kesel killed off Lori because of a mistaken belief Superman and Lois are "meant for each other," but it is possible to do the right thing for the wrong reason.

As for Bizarro...

Quote from: SuperMonkey
Bizarro is and should be a gag funny comedy character, that is the version which is the true version. If people didn't love that version we wouldn't keep coming up with wacky Bizarro versions of people and things. Try it, it's fun and that's the whole point.

As always, SuperMonkey, your observation would be accurate...if the Bronze Age had never happened at all. (I'm reminded of our discussion on Supergirl here.)

I'm amazed that we've gone this far and nobody has yet mentioned Martin Pasko's middle-seventies Bizarro stories, where not only did Bizarro acquire "backwards" powers like Shrinking Vision and Fire-Breath, but also he was a monstrous, tragic and not truly wicked Frankenstein creature duped by villains like the Toyman into evil acts because he didn't know any better.

This is why, though the Bizarro character was much more sympathetic and true to his roots in the Byrne/Helfer version, I'm not certain how much credit to give "Johnny Redbeard and his Seven Dwarves," because Bizarro hadn't been written as a goofy clown for at least a decade. A tragic, sympathetic Bizarro clone was old news even then.

Quote from: SuperMonkey
Ok, then what happen in the very next issue? What about every single appearance after that from 1959 to 1986?

Don't you mean "what about every single appearance after that from 1959-1965?" Again, after "Tales of" was replaced by "Superboy and the Legion" in ADVENTURE, Bizarro was either mostly ignored, used as a "retro" element that was no longer relevant, or written by guys like Pasko as a tragic monster.

Quote from: SuperMonkey
If you don't want funny Superman story, then create a new monster and make it tragic rather than trying to make a comedy character something which it is not suppose to be.

...And this statement would be true if it wasn't for the fact "Tales of the Bizarro World" just wasn't funny.

"Gags" like paperboys yelling "Yesterday's News! Don't read all about it!" are a less coarse society's version of snot or flatulence jokes: a goofy laugh if you're under ten, but intolerably immature and gag-inducing for anyone above that age.

Bizarro is another one of the characters that the 1950s (easily Superman's second-worst decade besides the 1990s) worked a horrible reverse-Rumplestiltskin effect: turning gold back into straw.

Quote from: TELLE
The Byrne Bizarro is just a rehash of the first Siegel Superboy story, with one or two new additions --the original was full of pathos and all the more impressive as it was written in the 1950s and was essentially a children's story (not to mention, the complexity of any work of art that involves Siegel, Superboy, and a copy of Superboy --a sort of metacommentary on the experience of Siegel losing control of his own   creation --Siegel was the Mary Shelley of kid's comics).

Interesting observation: Bizarro being a metaphor for Siegel's relationship with his famous character. And the original story is truly filled with incredible emotions, one of Jerry Siegel's great strengths.

Further, it's interesting to point out that the two things that the Helfer-edited version of the character did right were pretty much shot-by-shot xeroxes of the original stories.


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Uncle Mxy on February 19, 2007, 08:28:47 AM
Lori Lemaris, in many ways, is much more unique and has much more to do if she's dead. Alive, Lori's the Superman-girlfriend equivalent of Timothy Dalton: an also-ran James Bond that is nobody's favorite.

Does anyone seriously want Superman to get together with Lori? Anyone at all?

But if Lori died - and if she died tragically - she becomes transformed into a very powerful, emotional figure: she becomes Superman's tragic love.

I also like the fact that Byrne and Kesel incorporated Aquaman into the Lori Lemaris story. Previously, having two contradictory versions of Atlantis was one of the most thickheaded acts of idiocy ever perpetrated by Weisenger's jealous and arrogant editorial Iron Fist.

Granted, Byrne, Helfer, and Kesel killed off Lori because of a mistaken belief Superman and Lois are "meant for each other," but it is possible to do the right thing for the wrong reason.
It depends on what you mean by "get together".  Permanently?  Certainly not.  For more than a one-issue stand?  Indeed!  I think Lori has a place as a character who crops up from time to time, especially to give new artists a spin on "All This And Fins Too".  There's no "two women fighting each other for Superman's affection" stories anymore.  Maxima fights Superman for his affections as much as anything.  Lois has Superman.  Lana is resigned to never have Superman.  It'd be fun to see Superman driven a little mer-crazy  the same way that sailors were, especially if Lois is acting like a Parasite.  Just being a telepath could easily make for interesting antics, as much of a separation of worlds as air vs. water.  Of course, in post-Crisis, glub-glub Superman couldn't survive underwater indefinitely (ugh), so Lori would be hazardous to his health in a way that she wouldn't have been pre-Crisis (or probably post-IC). 



Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Michel Weisnor on February 19, 2007, 11:11:16 AM
BIZARRO TALK WITH ERIC POWELL

http://forum.newsarama.com/showthread.php?t=101979


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Permanus on February 19, 2007, 11:40:46 AM
BIZARRO TALK WITH ERIC POWELL

http://forum.newsarama.com/showthread.php?t=101979

Actually, I quite like his take on Bizarro from this interview. I've never read The Goon, but I've seen it on the stands; it looks quite good.


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Great Rao on February 19, 2007, 12:00:06 PM
I also like the fact that Byrne and Kesel incorporated Aquaman into the Lori Lemaris story. Previously, having two contradictory versions of Atlantis was one of the most thickheaded acts of idiocy ever perpetrated by Weisenger's jealous and arrogant editorial Iron Fist.

I never knew that it was Byrne and Kesel who tied these two different Atlantises together.  I had always thought PAD did that in The Atlantis Chronicles.

Quote
Granted, Byrne, Helfer, and Kesel killed off Lori because of a mistaken belief Superman and Lois are "meant for each other," but it is possible to do the right thing for the wrong reason.

If they killed off Lori Lemaris, then what was she doing in all those Stuart Immonen issues in the 1990s?


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: JulianPerez on February 19, 2007, 12:16:11 PM
Quote from: Great Rao
I never knew that it was Byrne and Kesel who tied these two different Atlantises together.  I had always thought PAD did that in The Atlantis Chronicles.

I never said Byrne and Kesel merged the story of the two Atlantises together. What I said they did was, they incorporated Aquaman into the Superman/Lori love story. It was in many ways a glorified cameo, but at least it was something.

And if you want to really get nitpicky, ATLANTIS CHRONICLES was hardly the first to attempt to tie the various Atlantises together in a history; the early eighties Paul Kupperberg fill-in issues of JLA had the ruins of Arion's magical Atlantis beneath Aquaman's, for example.

Quote from: Great Rao
If they killed off Lori Lemaris, then what was she doing in all those Stuart Immonen issues in the 1990s?

If I remember right, she was brought back later on, with some sort of amulet that let her have legs on land.

To the best of my knowledge, Lori Lemaris is still alive...and the fact she hasn't been used all that much really proves my point: Lori is a fun idea, but in practice there's very little that can really be done with her.


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Kuuga on February 19, 2007, 01:09:23 PM
Well, I'm sure your boy Johns will find a way to hack and slash her on-camera soon enough.


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Super Monkey on February 19, 2007, 08:19:59 PM
Well, I'm sure your boy Johns will find a way to hack and slash her on-camera soon enough.

Actually, he actually did just that in Infinite Crisis.

Quote
Don't you mean "what about every single appearance after that from 1959-1965?"

This is from the 1980's Pre-Crisis:

http://m.homestead.com/yellowlantern.html



Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: JulianPerez on February 20, 2007, 06:48:48 AM
What I find most interesting about Lori is that even among the people that LIKE her, she's not a favorite. The Timothy Dalton comparison gets more and more apt the more I think about it: even among people that like Dalton, he's never their favorite.

Unlike the Bizarro World (a terminally retarded concept that Jeph Loeb made a big mistake in resuscitating) I have a great deal of fondness for Lori Lemaris. I like her a great deal. However, she deserves a better niche than just "Superman's third or maybe fourth best girl."

Quote from: SuperMonkey
This is from the 1980's Pre-Crisis:

So the Bizarro concept was used in a deliberately retro and irrelevant manner after the deserved cancelation of his backup in the middle sixties? Wow, I guess that just torpedoes my whole point, doesn't it? I take it. All. Back.

Incidentally, summarizing the period of 1959-1986 with a broad stroke is deeply unwise,. as if Byrne and Wolfman and the rest somehow invented laughing at Superman's more out-there Silver Age elements in 1986, when that isn't true at all. Bizarro was a joke in lettercols as early as 1971. And when Gerry Conway actually had White Kryptonite serve a functional purpose in a story, the response was disbelief.

And this doesn't change the fact that the primary way Bizarro was written going back to Pasko's seventies issues, was as a mentally retarded, half-scary half-sympathetic monster.

This conversation brings to mind one thing I really, really liked about Martin Pasko's work on the Superman villains: he never treated one as a joke. He always took them seriously, even if they were somewhat ridiculous or less famous. Pasko was responsible for the restoration of the Rogues Gallery. Not only was Pasko the guy that brought back the original Toyman, he also gave us the second Metallo, the Atomic Skull, Master Jailer and brought Bizarro back after years and years of disuse.

Pasko never wrote Mxyzptlk as a clown, either. His two appearances of Mxyzptlk had him be a proud little elf whose humor comes not from his surreality, but the idea that Mxyzptlk was a supreme egotist...and that's hilarious because its coming from a midget in a derby hat. Under any writer other than Pasko, Mxy's never worked for me, because under other writers, Mxy bothers Superman out of some insane whim that's not sufficiently detailed. I guess they figure because he's a magical elf they don't have to give him a motivation like any other character. Pasko had Mr. Mxyzptlk bother Superman for a reason: in SUPERMAN 349, Mxyzptlk resents Superman; why should HE be happy when Mxy's having problems with his love life?

In other words, Pasko eliminated the LOST IN SPACE-ing of Mxy. What I mean by that is...in shows like a Western, if a bear or Indian attacks a man, they have to explain why it does so. On LOST IN SPACE, on the other hand, they figure, "Oh boy, let's have a big one-eyed gorilla come out and blast everybody!" And never explain why.

I have a question for you, SuperMonkey: were there any bad ideas in the Silver Age? Give specific examples. No, I don't mean ideas that were "bad" because they were similar to Marvel or the Iron Age, like the Doom Patrol's angst or the violence of Kanigher war comics. No, I mean something in the Silver Age that is a bad idea, that fails in the context of being a Silver Age story: I mean something like the Kite-Man or Bat-Mite, or Streaky the Super-Cat, or stories involving gimmickry like evil twins or a hero being regressed back to their childhood.

I strongly suspect there's an act of intellectual dishonesty going on here - that the Silver Age is exempted from having bad ideas (except when its like the modern age).


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Uncle Mxy on February 20, 2007, 09:41:42 AM
First off, I don't think that comparing Superman's "one true gf" is quite the same as comparing Bond actors, unless you think Superman "one true gf" must behave in some ritualistic way and with same particular affectations that Bond is most noted for.  Apply Bond's character traits to Superman's girl, you'd get "My name is Lane.  Lois Lane.  I like my beef bourguignon shaken, not stirred, Mr. Kentpenny."  I dunno...  seems like a different kind of challenge to me.  The closest I can think of the stereotypical traits for a girlfriend of Superman is screaming "HELP... SUPERMAN!". 

The thing about killing Lori off is that Superman's already had that plot with Lyla Lerrol.  Mermaids are interesting, and turn up enough in pop culture where it doesn't make sense for DC to kill Lori off.  They did 48 stories with Lori as a character before women's lib of the era made putting mermaids on the cover a bit square.  I think writing Lori calls for someone who can write romantic leads, and it's not an accident that the same person who created Lori created Lana. 


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: nightwing on February 20, 2007, 10:56:07 AM
JulianPerez writes:

Quote
What I find most interesting about Lori is that even among the people that LIKE her, she's not a favorite. The Timothy Dalton comparison gets more and more apt the more I think about it: even among people that like Dalton, he's never their favorite.

This is categorically false.  There's lots of Bond fans out there who like Dalton best, and defend him with a passion that borders on scary.  You can meet more than you'd ever want to at this site:

http://commanderbond.net/ (http://commanderbond.net/)


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Permanus on February 20, 2007, 04:48:26 PM
JulianPerez writes:

Quote
What I find most interesting about Lori is that even among the people that LIKE her, she's not a favorite. The Timothy Dalton comparison gets more and more apt the more I think about it: even among people that like Dalton, he's never their favorite.

This is categorically false.  There's lots of Bond fans out there who like Dalton best, and defend him with a passion that borders on scary.  You can meet more than you'd ever want to at this site:

http://commanderbond.net/ (http://commanderbond.net/)

And me! Me too!


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: JulianPerez on February 20, 2007, 04:55:37 PM
Quote from: nightwing
This is categorically false.  There's lots of Bond fans out there who like Dalton best,

Fair enough, but my point still stands: as a Superman girlfriend Lori Lemaris is an also-ran, but as a lost, doomed love she has a niche and serves a purpose.

Plus, that bit at the end with the "great poet of the sea that will tell their lost love forever" being a great humpbacked whale was a beautiful detail.

Quote from: Kuuga
Well, I'm sure your boy Johns will find a way to hack and slash her on-camera soon enough.

This, by the way, is why I prefer your dolphin-safe tuna.  ;D

I wonder what that comic would be called? "Superman's Trip to the Sushi Bar?"

It's really too bad when a beloved character dies...and you have to get the lemon and butter marinade out and have a barbecue! "Hey, Lori would have wanted it this way."

Boy, I sure am glad that Geoff Johns isn't a fat guy, because then the broken-record repetitive diss would be fat jokes. It could be worse, of course; Johns could be Polish.

Anyway, I notice no other element of Johns's skill is under fire. Nobody takes issue with his skill for characterization, nobody contradicts me when I say he has a skill for plots and pacing, or the ability to resuscitate and play straight less popular characters, his utilization of underused elements of the DCU from INFINITY INC to Stanley and his Monster, or his endless litany of deeds in the service of classic comics, from the restoration of Hal Jordan and the GLC to the return of "classic" Hawkman, to the return of Power Girl's Earth-2 origin, to the "elder statesman" JSA characterization that may have singlehandedly justified the existence of "Earth-0," to incredible and cool issues like Wildcat vs. the Injustice Society, issues entirely dedicated to the Flash Rogues, the JSA Thanksgiving party, and someone finally giving an "in-story" explanation for why it is death hasn't been able to stick.

I say without reservation that, if you really look at his record, Johns is the best thing that has happened to the DCU in the past 15 years, and its biggest fan of classic comics. And the Watchmen-style Captain Carrot story was pretty funny too (intentionally).

But hey, screw him. I mean, Johns isn't doing stories about monkeys in capes helping magical elves find lost cookies.

And frankly, Johns's penchant for violence is overrated, especially by people that just won't own up to never having read a Johns comic in their lives (hey, that's you, SuperMonkey!). Things that become true only by repetition are passed back and forth in comics fandom all the time, like "Roy Thomas is a misogynist," or "Don Heck is an artist you don't want anywhere near your book," or "Grant Morrison actually has talent."

The fact is, Johns is absolutely no different - NO DIFFERENT - from the rest of comics writers, and it is only hypocrisy, ignorance and a dishonest double-standard where he is excoriated for violence and Grant Morrison, Kurt Busiek, and Gail Simone get a free pass for it. Remember Ultraman  flash-frying people into corpses with his laser-vision in Busiek's JLA? Remember Gail Simone's VILLAINS UNITED where Hyena was shot iin the head and Dr. Psycho threatened prison wardens Soprano-style? Remember Luthor gangland executing the Parasite in a berserk fury in a prison riot in Grant Morrison's ASS #6?


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: JulianPerez on February 20, 2007, 05:06:35 PM
I just realized too, that Johns has a pretty good memory - and better still, he can translate that into meaningful characterization. An example would be something that I'll admit shamefully, an Earth-2 fan like me had forgotten: Jay and Joan Garrick are unable to have children. But it was Johns that put this together with Jay's membership in the JSA: Jay looks after the younger JSAers as if they were his own children for this very reason.


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Permanus on February 20, 2007, 05:40:46 PM
It's a little-known fact, but in addition to all his other qualities, Johns is also fully recyclable.


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Great Rao on February 20, 2007, 05:53:03 PM
Quote from: JulianPerez
I also like the fact that Byrne and Kesel incorporated Aquaman into the Lori Lemaris story. Previously, having two contradictory versions of Atlantis was one of the most thickheaded acts of idiocy ever perpetrated by Weisenger's jealous and arrogant editorial Iron Fist.

I never knew that it was Byrne and Kesel who tied these two different Atlantises together.  I had always thought PAD did that in The Atlantis Chronicles.

I never said Byrne and Kesel merged the story of the two Atlantises together. What I said they did was, they incorporated Aquaman into the Superman/Lori love story. It was in many ways a glorified cameo, but at least it was something.

Julian, I'm a little confused here.  What does "Previously, having two contradictory versions of Atlantis was a thickheaded act of idiocy" mean?  Unless I misread your post, this implies that in the Byrne/Kesel story, the two Atlantises were no longer contradictory.  How is that different from "tieing them together" (which is what I actually wrote, nothing at all about "merging")?

Perhaps this is only semantics, but I'm interested in the history of Atlantis and I'm trying to figure out what actually happened here.  All I had to go on was what you wrote.  My apologies if I misinterpreted it.

Continuing the Geoff Johns debate:

I'm also confused about how whenever anyone complains about the use of excessive gore and violence in Johns' comics, you spend paragraphs talking about what a great writer Geoff Johns is.

So what?  No one is disputing that with you - at least I'm not disputing it.  I think he's a fine writer.  Extremely skilled at his craft.  But that's not what I'm complaining about.  I've read plenty of his comics - enough to know that, yes, he does use an excessive amount of gore and blood - moreso than any other writer amongst those others you list.  I have read enough of his stories to make an accurate prediction that I will probably not enjoy his comics.  And occasionally I will check up on it:  I recently picked up an issue of JSA at the store and started to read it.  Then I put it back on the stands after I was assaulted by yet more gore and violence.  Same goes for Infinite Crisis and its lead-ins.  When IC was over, I was relieved that now I wouldn't have to read such disgusting stuff anymore.  I decided against 52 because I did not want to put myself through that experience again.

Just because someone is a skilled writer, doesn't mean that everyone has to enjoy his stories.  You say Johns is a good writer.  Doesn't mean that I - or anyone else - has to read him.  So what's your point?

I will state that the only exception to my no-Geoff-Johns rule is Action Comics, which I do read and enjoy.  The gore count seems to be lower than in his other work.  But if that changes, then I won't be reading it anymore.



Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Kuuga on February 20, 2007, 06:41:00 PM

And this doesn't change the fact that the primary way Bizarro was written going back to Pasko's seventies issues, was as a mentally retarded, half-scary half-sympathetic monster.

I don't think an element of humor can or should be denied with the character and to do so he really loses something. I would put humor in with the half-scary, half-sympathetic thing.

The issue here though is that given Johns track record it is painfully likely that he will lean more towards just the scary in the most gratuitous way possible and as has become his gimmick he'll go for gore. If he is emphasizing a horror movie zombie slant on the character then this will likely manifest itself the way I predicted in the early going of the thread.

Johns whole thing seems to be take x-Silver Age idea and make it grim and gory. Not to say he never has light in his stories because he does I'll admit that. I don't like his dialog but I have read stuff of his where there is some real heroic spirit going on but then he ultimately ruins it with darkness and gore stunts. Even the story world of DC itself right now is based on that. Take Identity Crisis. (Which I know Johns didn't right but dont try to tell me he doesn't have a hand in the editorial direction of DC and that story wasn't meant to set the tone of things to come). Okay, the Silver Age happened but it happened because b-grade villans like Dr. Light are actually a drooling rapists and sadists who were mind-woogied by the Justice League in a shades of grey clusterfart using Zatanna into being bankrobber types. The equation of this so-called new era of DC seems to be clear. The Silver Age can be around but only if it's bloodier than ever. This is supposed to take us *out* of the Iron Age?

I think in additon to this stuff being vastly unwarranted in a superhero book, it reduces the Bizzaro character to cheap shock value. While there is certainally a old monster movie vibe to the character he is not Dawn of the Dead splatter movie creature.


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Super Monkey on February 20, 2007, 07:12:41 PM
Quote
"Grant Morrison actually has talent."

I guess that's explains All-Star Superman. It also explains why I always take your opinions with a massive grain of salt.

BTW, there is a BIG difference between me refusing to BUY his comics and me not reading them, I have read enough to be able to know not to read anymore and that it is something I rather not support with my money.

If he is the best thing to happen to DC then all hope is lost.

The only thing he has going for himself is that he sells a lot of copies (for today's standards anyway).



Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Superman Forever on February 20, 2007, 08:46:06 PM
The Krypton Companion book from TwoMorrows made clear that even in the Bronze Age that were writers who really understood and loved Superman, like Maggin and Bates, and writers who wanted to do a Marvel version, like Gerry Conwey, Martin Pasko and Jim Shooter.

Mark Waid and Grant Morrison are the new Elliot S! Maggin. Kurt Busiek is heir of Bates.

That leaves Johns as one of the Marvel guys...


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: nightwing on February 21, 2007, 08:31:23 AM
Well, I think that pretty much sums it up. 

A scan of Julian's old posts will reveal he pretty much prefers a "Marvel" take on Superman, and in fact believes that the migration of Marvel writers to DC in the 70s is the only thing that saved the company from the doldrums of the Silver Age.

I, on the other hand, believe pretty much the opposite.  But that's what makes horse races.


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Kuuga on February 21, 2007, 11:34:39 AM
That leaves Johns as one of the Marvel guys...

I'm not sure any of the Marvel guys would gore the characters out the way Johns does.


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Great Rao on February 21, 2007, 12:01:21 PM
I agree, I think this analogy is doing a disservice to Marvel.

I'd say he's one of the E.C. guys.



Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: nightwing on February 21, 2007, 12:10:39 PM
I wonder.  Have you guys seen that "Marvel Zombies" trash?

Hard to imagine a gorier or more disrespectful use of one's characters than that.



Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Superman Forever on February 21, 2007, 12:29:03 PM
I've read the first issue of Marvel Zombies. Al least it's intended to be trash.

The miniseries Spider-Man: Reign, the atepted Dark Knight Returns of Marvel Comics, on the other hand...


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Great Rao on February 21, 2007, 12:59:45 PM
I wonder.  Have you guys seen that "Marvel Zombies" trash?

Hard to imagine a gorier or more disrespectful use of one's characters than that.

The actual analogy was

... there were writers who really understood and loved Superman, like Maggin and Bates, and writers who wanted to do a Marvel version, like Gerry Conwey, Martin Pasko and Jim Shooter.

Mark Waid and Grant Morrison are the new Elliot S! Maggin. Kurt Busiek is heir of Bates.

That leaves Johns as one of the Marvel guys...

I was talking about the traditional Marvel guys mentioned above: Conway, Pasko, and Shooter.

In that sense, I think the analogy is doing a disservice to Marvel.  Johns is nothing like any of them.


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Superman Forever on February 21, 2007, 01:09:05 PM
Actually, they have the same phylosophy about Superman. For the stories to be good, the important aspect is making the villains violent, more powerful and scary. Also they care more about subplots of minor characters. That's what both the Marvel writers and Geoff Johns said in interviews. Of course, only Johns like it to be gore and bloody.


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: JulianPerez on February 21, 2007, 02:20:20 PM
Quote from: nightwing
I wonder.  Have you guys seen that "Marvel Zombies" trash?

Hard to imagine a gorier or more disrespectful use of one's characters than that.

I can't find it in me to dislike Marvel Zombies as I'm not the target audience for it, and to the best of my knowledge this isn't happening in the "real" MU.

One of the reasons I'm able to be indifferent to the Hollywood style over substance antics of the Ultimates is because it's not the MU proper.

Quote from: Superman Forever
The Krypton Companion book from TwoMorrows made clear that even in the Bronze Age that were writers who really understood and loved Superman, like Maggin and Bates, and writers who wanted to do a Marvel version, like Gerry Conwey, Martin Pasko and Jim Shooter.

The ability to interview well does not necessarily indicate the ability to write well.

Actually, if anything, every interview I've read with Elliot Maggin, he comes off as slightly loony, comparing Superman to Abe Lincoln and Greek Mythology and so forth, in contrast to some of the more impressive stories he's done for both Superman and Green Arrow. On the other hand, Martin Pasko and Mark Waid come off as spectacularly funny and lucid interviewees, but they are merely competent and above-average as writers with the occasional great insight.

I don't know what you mean by "Marvel version," but I don't see how characterization-centered stories are incompatible with Superman, who is very much a complicated character.

Quote from: Superman Forever
Mark Waid and Grant Morrison are the new Elliot S! Maggin. Kurt Busiek is heir of Bates.

That leaves Johns as one of the Marvel guys...

Busiek reminds me much more of Len Wein than Bates, actually...Busiek's take on the Lois/Superman relationship (a topic that was Wein's favorite) and Superman's inner, introspective life under Busiek mirrors Wein's version of the character. The sequence where Lex Luthor realizes there's no Superman no oppose him in "Up, Up and Away," and Lex realizes how empty his life is without revenge, gave me flashbacks to the first few pages of the first Wein Galactic Golem story.

Actually, if I could compare Morrison to any Bronze Age guy, it would be Dennis O'Neil: a pro with a functional level understanding of the characters best served by being put in administration where they can do the least damage. I'd love to see Morrison as an editor much more than a writer.

I don't think its fair to judge Wolfman by his Superman stories, which showcase all of his weaknesses and none of his strengths, no more than it is fair to judge Englehart by his so-so NEW GUARDIANS, POWER MAN or SKULL THE SLAYER. Some writers just aren't cut out for Superman, who has to be written and plotted very differently and much more thoughtfully than other adventure characters...and that's not a poor reflection on them.

Funny, I was just reading Wolfman and Gil Kane's incredible JOHN CARTER WARLORD OF MARS comics, and it strikes me how well he was able to play around with the world ERB created, while staying true to it. The massive battle against a flying city was incredible. as was the sheer joyful fannishness of it; Tars Tarkas, a character ERB regrettably mostly ignored but who is beloved by fans, took center stage all the time in hois book...a sidekick like Spock or Kato, that is arguably way cooler than the hero.

Wolfman echoed all of the early ERB themes that even ERB himself forgot as time went on with his series: Mars as a dying planet,  the Tree of Life, the Atmosphere Factory, etc.

I'm not sure I'm crazy about Dejah Thoris as a warrior-princess, but she was a pre-feminist, screaming distraction and contemporary writers have to do SOMETHING to make her less useless.

It was interesting to see Frank Miller as guest-artist in JC, WARLORD OF MARS #19; he drew an awful lot like John Buscema in the early days.


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Super Monkey on February 21, 2007, 08:13:31 PM
I agree, I think this analogy is doing a disservice to Marvel.

I'd say he's one of the E.C. guys.




That's not very nice, those EC guys were super creative and talented!


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Criadoman on February 22, 2007, 12:38:50 AM
EC did rock.


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Michel Weisnor on February 22, 2007, 11:44:17 AM
I wonder.  Have you guys seen that "Marvel Zombies" trash?

Hard to imagine a gorier or more disrespectful use of one's characters than that.



I wonder.  Have you guys seen that "Marvel Zombies" trash?

Hard to imagine a gorier or more disrespectful use of one's characters than that.


Marvel Zombies has a slight connection with Superman. It seems the original intention was not zombie Sentry but zombie Superman crossing through a dimensional rift. Obviously, Marvel couldn't get a way with it. So, Superman was recolored to look like Sentry.

As Superman Forever and Julian pointed out, you probably know what you are going to read in Marvel Cannib...err..Zombies. 


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: JulianPerez on March 14, 2007, 05:21:54 AM
My main problem with the "Johns is too violent" critique is that it's arbitrarily singling out Johns for a characteristic of a lot of DC comics since 2002. Violence is a big element in superhero comics, yes, but why is Johns singled out and not other writers?

Busiek, for instance. Take his JLA run for example: Ultraman used his heat-vision to flash-fry dozens of people, with their smoking corpses shown on panel. And then, during the battle with the Void Hound, Captain Marvel was literally flipped inside-out by a reverse-bomb. It was a powerful moment that drove home the idea that the JLA just might lose this one, but it was still icky to see the Big Red Cheese popped like a grape.

And that's just Busiek here. I'm not even going to go into Gail Simone's violent BIRDS OF PREY. That book aside, her portrayal of supercrime in VILLAINS UNITED, including shots to the head and gangland crime that would make Tony Soprano wince. And I already brought up Morrison's Luthor-gunning-down-the-Parasite-in-a-prison-riot.

A while back, when we were talking about INFINITE CRISIS, I think it was Nightwing that complained about the series's $3.99 per issue price tag. And while the argument that comics cost too much may be a very valid one, that can't be held against Johns or the quality of the series INFINITE CRISIS.


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: nightwing on March 14, 2007, 09:36:59 AM
A while back, when we were talking about INFINITE CRISIS, I think it was Nightwing that complained about the series's $3.99 per issue price tag. And while the argument that comics cost too much may be a very valid one, that can't be held against Johns or the quality of the series INFINITE CRISIS.

That's sounds like something I'd say.  :D

If so, what I meant was that in a day when comics are so ridiculously expensive, I have to really, really like what I see before I buy one.  Lately, Cooke's "Spirit" and the new "Brave and the Bold" meet that criteria.  A gang of so-so artists drawing beheadings, dismemberments and fatal eye-pokes doesn't. But that's just me.  :)

Maybe if comics were still 50 cents a pop I'd buy them up by the armful and take my chances.   But as it stands, I have be a bit more responsible with my money.  That means flipping through each book before buying it, as insurance that even if the story stinks, I'll at least like the art.  When I see something that offends or sickens me, or just plain looks ugly, I put the book back.

Which is to say, maybe Johns wrote a true masterpiece in Infinite Crisis.  Maybe it's some of the most classic prose since the Bard himself put down his quill.  But since my glances at the artwork showed what looked like a TIME magazine color supplement on the atrocities in Darfur, I'll never know.



Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: DBN on March 14, 2007, 12:49:39 PM
My main problem with the "Johns is too violent" critique is that it's arbitrarily singling out Johns for a characteristic of a lot of DC comics since 2002. Violence is a big element in superhero comics, yes, but why is Johns singled out and not other writers?

Busiek, for instance. Take his JLA run for example: Ultraman used his heat-vision to flash-fry dozens of people, with their smoking corpses shown on panel. And then, during the battle with the Void Hound, Captain Marvel was literally flipped inside-out by a reverse-bomb. It was a powerful moment that drove home the idea that the JLA just might lose this one, but it was still icky to see the Big Red Cheese popped like a grape.

And that's just Busiek here. I'm not even going to go into Gail Simone's violent BIRDS OF PREY. That book aside, her portrayal of supercrime in VILLAINS UNITED, including shots to the head and gangland crime that would make Tony Soprano wince. And I already brought up Morrison's Luthor-gunning-down-the-Parasite-in-a-prison-riot.

A while back, when we were talking about INFINITE CRISIS, I think it was Nightwing that complained about the series's $3.99 per issue price tag. And while the argument that comics cost too much may be a very valid one, that can't be held against Johns or the quality of the series INFINITE CRISIS.

A bit off-topic, but it just goes to show you why DC needs a rating system similar to Marvel or why the Comic Code needs to be strictly enforced. Examples in recent months:

A. Osiris (Black Adam's brother-in-law) gets eaten alive in 52 by a Crocodile Man. Two pages were dedicated to this scene.
B. Men, women, and children of the Heywood family are massacred on panel in JSA by Nazis. Seven pages.
C. The Red Tornado get his human arm ripped off and eaten by Solomon Grundy in the latest JLA issue.
D. Osiris inadvertintly flies through the Persueder splitting him in half in 52. On panel and the Persueder's guts are shown all over Osiris.
E. Ice Maiden skinned alive in JSA Classified.
F. Captain Comet skinned. 52.

All take place in DC's mainstream line. No mature imprint. I would usually expect this level of violence to be contained to DC's Vertigo line or Marvel's Maxx.


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: MatterEaterLad on March 14, 2007, 02:48:13 PM
On the price issue, when I was buying 12 and 15 cent comics in the late 60s, a paperback novel was 50 cents.  So 3.99 comic and a 7.99 paperback are semi-comparable given that the quality of comic paper, ink etc. has improved and the binding and printing in paperbacks has as well.

No that I personally like the current comic quality, I much preferred the old newsprint and cheap ink - reminded me to enjoy them and not take them too seriously.


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: nightwing on March 14, 2007, 03:24:22 PM
 :o :o :o :o :o

Holy spit, I'm glad I don't read this stuff.

All things considered, I don't think "Mature Audiences" is the right tag, though.  "Older" maybe, but hardly mature.



Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Super Monkey on March 14, 2007, 06:54:19 PM
what is mature about that? ???

So I guess it isn't Johns fault since he is just mindlessly following along with what everyone else is doing?

o...k...





Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Great Rao on March 14, 2007, 08:22:19 PM

A bit off-topic, but it just goes to show you why DC needs a rating system similar to Marvel or why the Comic Code needs to be strictly enforced. Examples in recent months:


I agree, I would like a rating system that makes sense.  I used to be able to trust the CCA seal, but not anymore.  I don't think any of the individual comics you describe should get the same rating as an issue of Archie.  There needs to be "G" and "PG" equivalents for comic books. 

The industry needs to publicly publish what the CCA guidelines are - and then use the seal when the comic meets those guidelines, and don't use it when it doesn't.  Right now no one has any clue what it even means.

Potential readers (and parents!) deserve to be warned about certain things.  Just because a few people like sickness, doesn't mean that everyone should have to read it.


 


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Super Monkey on March 14, 2007, 08:35:28 PM

A bit off-topic, but it just goes to show you why DC needs a rating system similar to Marvel or why the Comic Code needs to be strictly enforced. Examples in recent months:


I agree, I would like a rating system that makes sense.  I used to be able to trust the CCA seal, but not anymore.  I don't think any of the individual comics you describe should get the same rating as an issue of Archie.  There needs to be "G" and "PG" equivalents for comic books. 

The industry needs to publicly publish what the CCA guidelines are - and then use the seal when the comic meets those guidelines, and don't use it when it doesn't.  Right now no one has any clue what it even means.

Potential readers deserve to be warned about certain things.  Just because a few people like sickness, doesn't mean that everyone should have to read it.

here is what it used to mean:

1954 Code highlights:

# Crimes shall never be presented in such a way as to create sympathy for the criminal, to promote distrust of the forces of law and justice, or to inspire others with a desire to imitate criminals.
# Scenes of excessive violence shall be prohibited. Scenes of brutal torture, excessive and unnecessary knife and gunplay, physical agony, gory and gruesome crime shall be eliminated.
# All scenes of horror, excessive bloodshed, gory or gruesome crimes, depravity, lust, sadism, masochism shall not be permitted.
# All lurid, unsavory, gruesome illustrations shall be eliminated.

isn't that nearly every comic today ;)


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: MatterEaterLad on March 14, 2007, 08:39:46 PM
Just change the meaning of "excessive" and "unnecessary" and you're good to go... ;)


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: TELLE on March 14, 2007, 10:59:54 PM
back in the 80s when they still thought superhero comics were for kids, a ratings system was also discussed.  funny how many of us now seem to think wertham was right! :0

story about finding an Iron Man comic for a 6 year old:

http://www.elegantmess.net/snap/2007/02/24/iron-kids/



Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: DBN on March 14, 2007, 11:34:42 PM

A bit off-topic, but it just goes to show you why DC needs a rating system similar to Marvel or why the Comic Code needs to be strictly enforced. Examples in recent months:


I agree, I would like a rating system that makes sense.  I used to be able to trust the CCA seal, but not anymore.  I don't think any of the individual comics you describe should get the same rating as an issue of Archie.  There needs to be "G" and "PG" equivalents for comic books. 

The industry needs to publicly publish what the CCA guidelines are - and then use the seal when the comic meets those guidelines, and don't use it when it doesn't.  Right now no one has any clue what it even means.

Potential readers (and parents!) deserve to be warned about certain things.  Just because a few people like sickness, doesn't mean that everyone should have to read it.


 

And that saddens me, the mainstream titles used to be books that could be enjoyed by all-ages. One of my sons is of comic-reading age and I cannot fully share my hobby with him as my Father did with me.

Thankfully, the Millar collection of Superman Adventures and the Showcase edition books are out there.

The industry likes to complain about lost readership all the time to other media outlets, but they have no one to blame but themselves because they shut off a majority of the market.

And every time someone steps up and says something to DC Editorial about the problem, they always point to the Johnny titles. Well, they haven't put forth any effort into the Johnny titles since Mark Millar was writing Superman Adventures and when Dini/Timm did some work on the Batman Adventures.


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: ShinDangaioh on March 15, 2007, 01:29:53 AM
Ah yes, the Johnny DC line defense.

If you can't handle mature themes in DC  comics, there is always the Johnny DC line.

I've always countered with the fact that I read the manga Bio-Bosster Armor Guyver and at times Blood of the Immortal.  Strangely enough, neither is as graphic as the more recent DC stuff.  Blood of the Immortal is supposed to be a bloodbath(the main character has to kill 10,000 men so that he can die), but now current DC comics have made it a bit pedestrian.  Heck the fight between Guyver I and Enzyme II is pretty sanitary and this is after Enzyme II crushed Guyver I's skull. 


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: nightwing on March 15, 2007, 08:11:09 AM
Well of course I've said it many times, but I'm getting old so I'll repeat myself again  :D....

There is nothing "mature" about superhero comics.  Nothing.  Whether the stories feature dogs in capes and sprites from the fifth dimension or rapes, assasinations and beheadings, at their core they are still stories about people who fly, shoot beams out of their orifices and fool their closest friends with lame disguises. Therefore, the whole concept of superhero comics for "mature" readers is an oxymoron. The only mature comics reader is one who can recognize the juvenile nature of the genre and enjoy it for what it is, instead of piling on the sex and violence and kidding themselves they're reading something "grown up."

In my book, people who enjoy seeing mutilations and sexual assaults in comics are no different from the guys who write fan fiction about having sex with Smurfette or Strawberry Shortcake.  They are pathetic weirdos, and the fact that so many books cater to this twisted little cabal of fruitcakes is beyond sad.

I have two young sons who love books of all kinds, but I'd never let them read a new comic.  I may share my Showcase volumes with them, though, once I'm sure the crayons are hidden away.  :D


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: JulianPerez on March 15, 2007, 12:06:23 PM
This is all only shocking if you're not paying attention to what's going on in popular culture as a whole. See the average action movie or horror film aimed at adolescents, and there's as much if not more violence.

And you think the violence in 52 is bad? Hooo brother, just WAIT 'till you check out those ultraviolent porno comics they make over in Japan. And spazzy teens are buying those by the truckload!

And this is all hardly a new or recent phase for popular culture. Edgar Rice Burroughs had far more violence in RETURN OF TARZAN alone (written in the 1910s-1920s) than any three Geoff Johns put together...and had a far more spectacular body count to boot!

(This is why I can never be a curmudgeon: to be a curmudgeon you have to think things are gettings worse, when the one great insight studying history reveals is how little things really change.)

Is the violence disturbing? Maybe, it all depends on your personal judgment. But it's hardly UNIQUE. Which is my point here about Geoff Johns: he's being unfairly singled out.

There was far uglier violence in DELIVERANCE than there was in RAMBO II. But look at the difference in culture: we're far more willing to embrace violence and sex in the era of BOB AND ALICE and SHAMPOO, than we are in the uptight, hypocritical eighties, the age of parents' groups banning heavy metal.

Quote from: DBN
And that saddens me, the mainstream titles used to be books that could be enjoyed by all-ages. One of my sons is of comic-reading age and I cannot fully share my hobby with him as my Father did with me.

I don't think it's lamentable superhero comics are no longer being marketed to kids, nor do I think it is a good trend, either - demographics are like gravity. How can you have an opinion for or against gravity? Or, rather, judging a comic based on the intended audience is being intellectually dishonest, because you're not judging a book by its own standards.

To put it another way, I don't think, say, the John Broome GREEN LANTERN is "better" than the Stan Lee/Don Heck AVENGERS because Stan and Don were going for an older audience than John Broome was. Maybe for other reasons, but not THAT one.

Well of course I've said it many times, but I'm getting old so I'll repeat myself again  :D....

There is nothing "mature" about superhero comics.  Nothing.  Whether the stories feature dogs in capes and sprites from the fifth dimension or rapes, assasinations and beheadings, at their core they are still stories about people who fly, shoot beams out of their orifices and fool their closest friends with lame disguises. Therefore, the whole concept of superhero comics for "mature" readers is an oxymoron. The only mature comics reader is one who can recognize the juvenile nature of the genre and enjoy it for what it is, instead of piling on the sex and violence and kidding themselves they're reading something "grown up."

I agree with what you're saying for the most part, but I don't understand how violence is somehow not a part of the superhero kind of story, something foreign or anathema to it. In fact, violence and sex to an extent are inevitable, and I don't just mean Comics Code stuff like Thor and Hulk pounding the stuff out each other in an abandoned warehouse district.

Stylized, over the top violence belongs in superhero comics. Superhero comics are an outgrowth of the b-movie tradition and aesthetic in many ways, where teenagers get their faces eaten off by space monsters, and seeing in what weird way the Plant Monster is going to kill next is part of the thrill.

Consider KILL BILL, which is pretty much just a Silver/Bronze Age Martial Arts comic made in movie form and the closest we'll see to a truly accurate IRON FIST picture: the violence FIT IN with the masks and the motorcycles and samurai swords and the villainesses with eyepatches, particularly the scene where Uma, with all the swagger she can muster, says "You are all free to go. But those of you that lost limbs, leave them here, as they now belong to ME."

Quote from: Great Rao
I agree, I would like a rating system that makes sense.  I used to be able to trust the CCA seal, but not anymore.  I don't think any of the individual comics you describe should get the same rating as an issue of Archie.  There needs to be "G" and "PG" equivalents for comic books. 

The industry needs to publicly publish what the CCA guidelines are - and then use the seal when the comic meets those guidelines, and don't use it when it doesn't.  Right now no one has any clue what it even means.

Potential readers (and parents!) deserve to be warned about certain things. 

I agree with what you're saying about a rating system that makes sense.

Does any comic use the CCA anymore? Marvel went off of it by 2002 - and I would argue they only pulled the sticker off to acknowledge the reality of the situation: nobody really was following the CCA anymore. And why should they? The CCA was a toothless, irrelevant hold over from the 1950s (insert any given speech by Frank Miller here).

Actually, I would argue the CCA started to be irrelevant come the 1970s. When you had the White Queen show up in what was essentially bondage leather on the COVER of UNCANNY X-MEN, which is the very definition of a mainstream title, you get a feeling this code doesn't have teeth anymore.


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: MatterEaterLad on March 15, 2007, 01:00:28 PM
And this is all hardly a new or recent phase for popular culture. Edgar Rice Burroughs had far more violence in RETURN OF TARZAN alone (written in the 1910s-1920s) than any three Geoff Johns put together...and had a far more spectacular body count to boot!
Well, I don't want to take the violence out of Tarzan, the Bible, or even what remains of the Greek myths.

I do think the the Tarzan series got incredibly silly, "The Return of Tarzan" was the last in the series that I read through, liking only really "Tarzan of the Apes" myself.

I think the point is that genre is important, knowing that the comics of your youth were about characters that solved problems with ability and intelligence (rarely rage and gore) makes it dissappointing for those who want new generations to see that.  And the new stories use the same titles and characters.

Its like growing up with "The Waltons" and then finding the modern iteration of the family is about extramarital sex with the office assistant, insider trading, and deliberately exploiting third world labor.


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: DBN on March 15, 2007, 01:11:35 PM
Quote
I don't think it's lamentable superhero comics are no longer being marketed to kids, nor do I think it is a good trend, either - demographics are like gravity. How can you have an opinion for or against gravity? Or, rather, judging a comic based on the intended audience is being intellectually dishonest, because you're not judging a book by its own standards.

To put it another way, I don't think, say, the John Broome GREEN LANTERN is "better" than the Stan Lee/Don Heck AVENGERS because Stan and Don were going for an older audience than John Broome was. Maybe for other reasons, but not THAT one.

I'm not judging the books based on their intended audience, I'm judging them based on their content. The actual content in the books I mentioned is of an R-rated level or more.

Yes, violence is a part of superhero comics. That's common knowledge and has been with us since the inception of said comics. I'm talking about depiction. The Golden Age Superman killed some criminals, but did the comics show him tearing a man in half on panel? No.

In JLU Aquaman had to cut off his hand to save his son, but did they show him cutting his hand off on screen? No. Did it have the same impact? Yes.

Heck, here's an example from the '90s. The Toyman killed Cat Grant's son, but did they show it in full glory on panel? No, and this was in the heyday of the Iron Age.

Compare the above example with the disgusting scene in JSA #3 in which Baroness Blitzkrieg is shown murdering a woman and child that on panel. Seven pages are dedicated to the massacre of the Heywood family. Seven. Yeah, I tend to think of that as going too far and is completly unecessary.

And yes, I've since dropped 52 and JSA from my pull-list in protest and dropped JLA a long time ago for being generally boring.


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: nightwing on March 15, 2007, 01:58:54 PM
Julian Perez writes:

Quote
This is all only shocking if you're not paying attention to what's going on in popular culture as a whole. See the average action movie or horror film aimed at adolescents, and there's as much if not more violence.

Yes, but as Matter Eater Lad suggests, this "hip trend" is forced onto superhero comics in a manner that runs counter to their nature.  Slasher movies are true to themselves: they're about gore and they deliver.  Modern action films are created for a specific purpose (mindless mayhem and destruction) and they deliver.  But these are comics featuring characters created in another time with another aesthetic entirely in mind.  The whole reason it's shocking that Psycho Pirate gets his eyes poked through the back of his head is not because it's violent, or even because it's more graphic than anything seen before.  It's shocking is because he's an familiar, long-running character with his roots firmly set in a simpler, more innocent time.  It's like having Donald Duck gang-raped in prison or Ronald McDonald tossed in a wood chipper. 

Does violence have a place in superhero comics? Sure.  Is hyper-violence fair game in a comics story?  I guess if that's what you want.  But when these modern hacks pull a cheap, easy stunt by taking a dump on characters they didn't even create, you'll pardon me if I'm not in awe of their "creativity."  It takes a lot of skill to build a house, but not so much to burn it down.  It might make you look "kewl" in front of your delinquent pals, but in the end you're a destroyer, not a creator.

If these guys want to tell stories about sex with superpowers, or how brutally "real" heroes would kill each other, then fine...let them invent their own characters and do whatever they like to them.  But when they deface the works of other artists, artists I consider superior in the first place, then I've got no respect for them. They're just punk vandals.

Quote
Is the violence disturbing? Maybe, it all depends on your personal judgment. But it's hardly UNIQUE. Which is my point here about Geoff Johns: he's being unfairly singled out.

I for one am not singling him out, at least not deliberately.  In fact, I don't think I've ever bought a comic he wrote.  I just use IC as an example because it was such a high-profile event that even I managed to read hunks of it (on the stands or on-line).  And what I saw was nauseating.  If I picked up a comic written by some other hack, I'd rail against that one, too.

But for the record, just because "everyone else is doing it" doesn't get Johns off the hook, anymore than it got me off the hook when I tried that line on my parents.

Quote
There was far uglier violence in DELIVERANCE than there was in RAMBO II.

And now comics provide both kinds! Lucky us.

Quote
But look at the difference in culture: we're far more willing to embrace violence and sex in the era of BOB AND ALICE and SHAMPOO, than we are in the uptight, hypocritical eighties, the age of parents' groups banning heavy metal.

Well, if you're going to compare eras, consider the journey from 1971, when Disney sued an underground comix publisher over the "Air Pirates" strip that had their characters engaging in sex and drug use (among other things) to the modern day, where Marvel and DC perpetrate similar acts of character rape on their own properties.  Thirty-five years ago, the stand was "you will not make money from disgracing our characters" and today the sentence ends with, "...that's our job!"






Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: VanZee on March 15, 2007, 07:14:29 PM
[snip]


Well, if you're going to compare eras, consider the journey from 1971, when Disney sued an underground comix publisher over the "Air Pirates" strip that had their characters engaging in sex and drug use (among other things) to the modern day, where Marvel and DC perpetrate similar acts of character rape on their own properties.  Thirty-five years ago, the stand was "you will not make money from disgracing our characters" and today the sentence ends with, "...that's our job!"


[/snip]

One of the best posts I've ever read.  Acid, yet amusing.  Well done.


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Super Monkey on March 15, 2007, 07:32:49 PM
it's all true!


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Superman Forever on March 15, 2007, 09:10:32 PM
That Geoff Johns guy we're trashing wrote once one of the best all-ages super-hero comics ever: Star and Stripes. It was a lot of fun, really different from his current work. The first arc will be collected on TPB and I recommed it. And believe me when I say it was a Johns super-hero book for all ages.


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Michel Weisnor on March 15, 2007, 11:22:57 PM
That Geoff Johns guy we're trashing wrote once one of the best all-ages super-hero comics ever: Star and Stripes. It was a lot of fun, really different from his current work. The first arc will be collected on TPB and I recommed it. And believe me when I say it was a Johns super-hero book for all ages.

I never got around to reading Johns' Stars & S.T.R.I.P.E. I'll have to check it out.

My criticism of Johns' work is pretty direct and simple. He's got real talent but uses violence like a crutch. It's most of the time unnecessary and distracts the reader from overall satisfaction.


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: jamespup on March 16, 2007, 08:22:21 PM
Although the price comparison works regarding comics and paperbacks, in general BOTH of those prices seem to have risen considerably higher than other items......anyone recall what a daily newspaper went for during the 12-15 cent comic era?   I can get a hamburger off the dollar menu, i seem to recall they were about a quarter during that time.

also, my father didn't bristle about giving me a quarter every once in a while for me to get two comics and a penny change, because in his mind, they had only gone up 2 cents since he was a kid.

regardless of the drop in page count.


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: ShinDangaioh on March 17, 2007, 04:07:28 PM
The comment about Japananese comics, I'll take a shot at.

Yes, there are ultra-violent comics and those that really glorify objification of women.  Rape Man: Rapist for Hire comes to mind here.

There is also those comics that pander to the kidies, such as Hamtaro

But there is a wide range of comics in between those.

Zenmai Jikake no Tina for eample is a sweet little story that has no need for violence or sex. 

Guyver is violent, but not to the levels that currrent DC comics are.  The death count is up there, but not that blatant. 

DC comics is up to Fist of the North Star(Your body will explode in ten seconds)

Slayers has violence, since it is sword and fantasy, but not truly extreme.  Sure there are jokes about 'that time of the month' and Lina's chest sixe, but that is pretty much as far as it goes when it comes to sexual situations.

Ah! My Goddes has been going on for years and we are still waiting for Keichii and Belldandy to kiss each other.

Japan doesn't really have a nudity taboo, so any nudity gets ignored.

I'm not really trashing Johns.  I'm trashing DC's refusal to have any other genres.  This ultra-violent stuff should be in Vertigo(that's what the imprint was created for).  Kiddie stuff like Power Puff Gilrs, Dexter's Lab, Scooby-Doo and others in the Johnny DC line.  And stuff inbetween in the mainstream. 

DC is maintaining that there are only two genres.  The kiddie stuff like Scooby-Doo and the gore fest that is Infinite Crisis and there is nothing inbetween


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Super Monkey on March 17, 2007, 05:20:21 PM
Manga is also read by far, far, far more people than American comics. Comics in Japan are as common as Newspapers are here in the US.

DC makes superhero comics and that's it. They do have some other non-hero lines, but DC is all about Batman, Superman and the rest. These are all suppose to be comics for all ages, but that is no longer the case.

Of course, it is NOT Johns fault 100%, clearly he is just following the current threads, trust me, if DC didn't want their comics to be gore encrusted mindless crapfests, then the editors would never ever let them get made in the 1st place.

There are other types of comics in the US besides Superheroes!!! You know some of which FAR OUTSELL any superhero comic being made today.

Real mature comic book do not feature superheroes.

I mean these of course: http://www.time.com/time/2005/100books/0,24459,graphic_novels,00.html

Neither do real children's comics! Children's picture books and things like Harry Potter has taken over that segment.



Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: crispy snax on March 17, 2007, 06:39:42 PM
oh wow

that list includes dark night returns... which i was horribly unimpressed by... after hearing it all talked up as being amazing and revolutionary it read like... a good batman story (as opposed to watchmen, which gripped me)

btw, who here reads daniel clowes? his stories to me are kind of depressing yet fun to read.. when i first read ghost world it was pretty much explained my world as an angst ridden, 17 year old


Title: Re: Action Comics is out of Action
Post by: Super Monkey on March 17, 2007, 07:58:13 PM
oh wow

that list includes dark night returns... which i was horribly unimpressed by... after hearing it all talked up as being amazing and revolutionary it read like... a good batman story (as opposed to watchmen, which gripped me)

btw, who here reads daniel clowes? his stories to me are kind of depressing yet fun to read.. when i first read ghost world it was pretty much explained my world as an angst ridden, 17 year old


I really loved the DKR, just don't think of it as Batman story, and you will like it a lot more, LOL! Frank Miller is pretty good as long as he does his own stuff, rather than anyone else's characters. (except for Daredevil, which was the best Daredevil ever, IMHO) I just don't think his Batman was very good, DKR was an elsewheres tale, so it gets a lot of slack from me.

Daniel Clowes is super talented! I read many of his stories at library, but I own Eightball #23 with his own Superhero "The Death-Ray!", great stuff!

review: http://www.popmatters.com/comics/eightball-23.shtml