Not impressed with Marvel Comics(from the 1960s)
#26
DVD Talk Legend
Thread Starter
Re: Not impressed with Marvel Comics(from the 1960s)
Been reading the Marvel Omnibuses(X-Men V1,FF V1,Spider-man V1). Spider-man has been the best so far. As expected-the background artistry isn't as good as DC Comics during that time period. Seems rushed. Also noticed an overabundance of Sub-Mariner. He seems like a secondary character that was overexposed during that time frame. I would like to get FF V2-but right now its cost prohibitive. Would also like to get Tomb of Dracula ,but V1 is still quite costly. Is there any talk of second printings coming out?
#27
Re: Not impressed with Marvel Comics(from the 1960s)
I still have all those key issues of FF. I sometimes like to pull stuff out just to look at them and I now find they were horribly written and drawn. Their a chore to read and really not that good. Most people see them through rose colored glasses and think their the best things ever to come out but honestly they don't hold up to the test of time. The later writers and artist that added onto the mythos are the ones that actually made the characters interesting. Saying that I love the fact I own a piece of comic book history.
Not sure about the 60's run, but I think the 70's-early 80's FF was really fun sci-fi and I enjoy going back to them.
#28
Banned by request
Re: Not impressed with Marvel Comics(from the 1960s)
But now that I have a comic reader on my iPad (and I have to say, out of all the things I use the iPad for, reading comics on it is by far my number one use for it) and I'm able to throw 30 years worth of a single title on there, I have to say it's quite difficult to read a lot of those old comics. While I can certainly appreciate the creativity that went into early Iron Man, Fantastic Four, Spider-Man, etc, the dialogue is so blunt and obvious that it really makes them difficult to read now.
All the time I'll see dialogue like "Oh no! The police have captured me, Reed Richards, also known as Mr. Fantastic of the Fantastic Four, and think I am the culprit, even though I've been set up!" And this will be right after the villains explained to Mr. Fantastic how they've set up him up, and that will be after Villain A explained it to Villain B, and so on. Now, I know Stan Lee and Steve Kirby and all those guys were basically making this stuff up on the spot, but with the arrival of more sophisticated writers onto the scene (who no doubt had been hugely influenced by the writers in the 60's), a good chunk of those defining Marvel comics look antiquated.
So I can appreciate those comics for their place in history, and how they helped open things up to today's writers, but it's something that's much easier for me to admire from afar.
That being said, the current Marvel universe is a sickening joke.
#29
DVD Talk Hero
Re: Not impressed with Marvel Comics(from the 1960s)
People who read comics, as well as those who work in the industry, tend to oversell the actual quality of these books. They're important as historical artifacts, but they are not great literature or art by any measure.
As for the current state of the Marvel Universe, I've read so few stories in it that I can't really comment other than to say it appears, from afar, that they're doing some really interesting things with it, but when I get closer it looks like a huge fucking mess where you have a handful of "good" comics so tightly interwoven with a truckload of drek that it becomes impossible to separate the two.
#30
Suspended
Re: Not impressed with Marvel Comics(from the 1960s)
There's no accounting for taste, but I would put a Lee/Kirby or Lee/Ditko book up against anything coming out of mainstream comics these days. I mean, do you really think Batman R.I.P. or Blackest Night or Avengers: The Siege is significantly better than some of those Fantastic Four or Thor or Spider-Man epics?
I'm currently reading Essential Iron Man 3, which is late Silver/early Bronze Age stuff, mostly by Archie Goodwin and George Tuska, and I'm enjoying it just as much as most of the stuff I bought new off the racks last week. None of it is going to set the world on fire, but neither is Shadowland or Brightest Day.
I'm currently reading Essential Iron Man 3, which is late Silver/early Bronze Age stuff, mostly by Archie Goodwin and George Tuska, and I'm enjoying it just as much as most of the stuff I bought new off the racks last week. None of it is going to set the world on fire, but neither is Shadowland or Brightest Day.
#31
Re: Not impressed with Marvel Comics(from the 1960s)
There's no accounting for taste, but I would put a Lee/Kirby or Lee/Ditko book up against anything coming out of mainstream comics these days. I mean, do you really think Batman R.I.P. or Blackest Night or Avengers: The Siege is significantly better than some of those Fantastic Four or Thor or Spider-Man epics?
I'm currently reading Essential Iron Man 3, which is late Silver/early Bronze Age stuff, mostly by Archie Goodwin and George Tuska, and I'm enjoying it just as much as most of the stuff I bought new off the racks last week. None of it is going to set the world on fire, but neither is Shadowland or Brightest Day.
I'm currently reading Essential Iron Man 3, which is late Silver/early Bronze Age stuff, mostly by Archie Goodwin and George Tuska, and I'm enjoying it just as much as most of the stuff I bought new off the racks last week. None of it is going to set the world on fire, but neither is Shadowland or Brightest Day.
Last edited by mrhan; 10-10-10 at 06:56 PM.
#32
Banned by request
Re: Not impressed with Marvel Comics(from the 1960s)
There's no accounting for taste, but I would put a Lee/Kirby or Lee/Ditko book up against anything coming out of mainstream comics these days. I mean, do you really think Batman R.I.P. or Blackest Night or Avengers: The Siege is significantly better than some of those Fantastic Four or Thor or Spider-Man epics?
I'm currently reading Essential Iron Man 3, which is late Silver/early Bronze Age stuff, mostly by Archie Goodwin and George Tuska, and I'm enjoying it just as much as most of the stuff I bought new off the racks last week. None of it is going to set the world on fire, but neither is Shadowland or Brightest Day.
I'm currently reading Essential Iron Man 3, which is late Silver/early Bronze Age stuff, mostly by Archie Goodwin and George Tuska, and I'm enjoying it just as much as most of the stuff I bought new off the racks last week. None of it is going to set the world on fire, but neither is Shadowland or Brightest Day.
I just got finished doing my annual re-reading of Sandman, and that comic is subtle, layered, artistic, touching, and I cannot ever heap enough praise upon it. That Neil Gaiman took inspiration from what had been done in the 60's and 70's (and 80's) is without doubt, but it also shows how far comics have come since then.
But yeah, if all you're reading is the latest Marvel crossover, the 60's stuff is an absolute masterpiece by comparison.
#33
Re: Not impressed with Marvel Comics(from the 1960s)
Untrue (the bolded part). At least, it is in my case. I own all of the DVD-Roms that were sold a couple years back, and I can't even stomach anything past, say 1993. I'll eventually read them all, every single issue; but the recent stuff doesn't thrill me at all.
And, like I stated earlier, I think you had to live through it to appreciate its' incredible awesomeness today.
And, like I stated earlier, I think you had to live through it to appreciate its' incredible awesomeness today.
#34
Re: Not impressed with Marvel Comics(from the 1960s)
In my younger days I didn't have as great an appreciation for Jack Kirby or Steve Ditko as I do today, hell the rest of the Bullpen even, but never once did I think their comics were "horribly drawn". I still think Ditko was the perfect Spider-Man artist and Kirby had a majesty to his work that no one's come close to. Granted, some of the inking was a bit rough and I'm sure some of the work was rushed, but it still is miles better than most art being produced today. I personally don't enjoy the work of guys like Ethan Van Sciver, Ivan Reiss or (especially) Alex Ross. I never needed, or wanted for that matter, my comics to look or be realistic. Give me the classics any day.
#35
DVD Talk Hero
Re: Not impressed with Marvel Comics(from the 1960s)
I think we've had this discussion before, but there's no way you're going to read the entire universe of Marvel or DC books and get the same quality as you had back then, just because they've expanded so much. When you have like two writers and two artists doing everything, you can have better continuity and better QC.
Having grown up on Claremont's X-men and Byrne's FF and Simonson's Thor, I like the multipart, layered epics that were lacking in the 60s.
You can still get excellent books that you can read (but that admittedly will still get pulled into a crossover here or there) in different corners of both Marvel and DC. If you want a superhero universe that is much more self contained try something like Invincible.
Just as an aside, it seems like there are a bunch of creators these days who have a lot of reverence and or knowledge of the history of both universes and will try to "fix" old continuity. Sometimes, they do amazing things, and it seems like there's a real push to get obscure characters back into the limelight. Other times, I'm sure old timers feel like they're just trampling on memories.
Having grown up on Claremont's X-men and Byrne's FF and Simonson's Thor, I like the multipart, layered epics that were lacking in the 60s.
You can still get excellent books that you can read (but that admittedly will still get pulled into a crossover here or there) in different corners of both Marvel and DC. If you want a superhero universe that is much more self contained try something like Invincible.
Just as an aside, it seems like there are a bunch of creators these days who have a lot of reverence and or knowledge of the history of both universes and will try to "fix" old continuity. Sometimes, they do amazing things, and it seems like there's a real push to get obscure characters back into the limelight. Other times, I'm sure old timers feel like they're just trampling on memories.
#36
Re: Not impressed with Marvel Comics(from the 1960s)
In my younger days I didn't have as great an appreciation for Jack Kirby or Steve Ditko as I do today, hell the rest of the Bullpen even, but never once did I think their comics were "horribly drawn". I still think Ditko was the perfect Spider-Man artist and Kirby had a majesty to his work that no one's come close to. Granted, some of the inking was a bit rough and I'm sure some of the work was rushed, but it still is miles better than most art being produced today. I personally don't enjoy the work of guys like Ethan Van Sciver, Ivan Reiss or (especially) Alex Ross. I never needed, or wanted for that matter, my comics to look or be realistic. Give me the classics any day.
I don't like Ross' art, either and I don't know why Jim Lee is so popular. His early work in the X titles were good but to me his work at DC and especially Batman just doesn't do it for me. I read the TPB's and everyone looks the same and Batman seems to always be drawn posing.
#38
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 6,290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Not impressed with Marvel Comics(from the 1960s)
I know this isn't the 1960s-related, but regarding the topic of just "Not impressed with Marvel Comics" in general, I don't think Marvel ever had a really amazing mainstream book except for Mark Gruenwald's 1980s SQUADRON SUPREME utopia book. I think it's the most interesting Marvel superhero book yet. It's Marvel's way of poking fun at DC's Justice League but doing it with one of the best storylines I have ever read for a mainstream Marvel book. Once I became an adult, I realized that there was not one interesting storyline for any of my favorite superhero characters such as Spiderman, Hulk, Iron Man, etc.
#39
Banned by request
Re: Not impressed with Marvel Comics(from the 1960s)
I think Spider-Man had several great storylines in the 60's and 70's, and the Dark Phoenix storyline in X-Men is probably the best mainstream superhero storyline (in continuity) I've ever read.
#40
Suspended
Re: Not impressed with Marvel Comics(from the 1960s)
Supr: Comparing 60s Marvel to Sandman is a bit unfair. Sandman is probably one of the top 5 comics of all time in terms of literary merit. Saying the 60s marvel stuff falls short of that is like writing off Citizen Kane because the movies of the 40s don't stand up to the Godfather.
Toddly: For Spider-Man, read the Lee/Ditko stuff, particularly the Master Planner stuff from 31-33. Or read Kraven's Last Hunt. Or Roger Stern's work with the character. Or the amazing stuff Gerry Conway and Sal Buscema did with the character in the late 80s.
For Hulk, try any number of Peter David's stories. Or Greg Pak's Planet Hulk or World War Hulk.
For Iron Man, Michelinie and Layton did amazing things with the character -- try their Demon in a Bottle story, or Armor Wars.
As I said to Supr, if you're looking for something to rival Sandman (or Watchmen, or Maus), you're probably not going to find it. There have certainly been glimpses of that kind of genius over the years, but the nature of a sustained serial comic tends away from that sort of literary merit because ongoing superhero comics don't allow for the beginning, middle, and end necessary for true literary merit. A large part of why Squadron Supreme was so good was because Gruenwald was allowed to move the characters from Point A to Point B and not have to move them back to Point A.
Toddly: For Spider-Man, read the Lee/Ditko stuff, particularly the Master Planner stuff from 31-33. Or read Kraven's Last Hunt. Or Roger Stern's work with the character. Or the amazing stuff Gerry Conway and Sal Buscema did with the character in the late 80s.
For Hulk, try any number of Peter David's stories. Or Greg Pak's Planet Hulk or World War Hulk.
For Iron Man, Michelinie and Layton did amazing things with the character -- try their Demon in a Bottle story, or Armor Wars.
As I said to Supr, if you're looking for something to rival Sandman (or Watchmen, or Maus), you're probably not going to find it. There have certainly been glimpses of that kind of genius over the years, but the nature of a sustained serial comic tends away from that sort of literary merit because ongoing superhero comics don't allow for the beginning, middle, and end necessary for true literary merit. A large part of why Squadron Supreme was so good was because Gruenwald was allowed to move the characters from Point A to Point B and not have to move them back to Point A.
#41
DVD Talk Godfather
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Home of 2013 NFL champion Seahawks
Posts: 52,456
Received 987 Likes
on
818 Posts
Re: Not impressed with Marvel Comics(from the 1960s)
When I was 4, I had an uncle who gave me 1/2 of a washing machine box full of comics. He was going off to college, and had no more use for these childish things known as "comic books". I had the full runs of several (most) Marvel titles (though that was when most then-current Marvel books had less than 50 issues under their belt each), as well as horror, humor, adventure, western, and other comics that dated back to the early 50's in that big-ass box.
But I was only 4 years old, and had only began reading the year before (I had an early start thanks to my parents, who were diligent in their efforts to have me reading on my own, for fun, at a young age). The books didn't last long, and many (most) of them got cut up by those little fucking round-edged scissors, and then glued to construction paper with a lil' Elmers.
I know, I know. But, cripes, I was only 4.
But I was only 4 years old, and had only began reading the year before (I had an early start thanks to my parents, who were diligent in their efforts to have me reading on my own, for fun, at a young age). The books didn't last long, and many (most) of them got cut up by those little fucking round-edged scissors, and then glued to construction paper with a lil' Elmers.
I know, I know. But, cripes, I was only 4.
#42
DVD Talk Godfather
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Home of 2013 NFL champion Seahawks
Posts: 52,456
Received 987 Likes
on
818 Posts
Re: Not impressed with Marvel Comics(from the 1960s)
I've often been an advocate on this board for the FF arc of Frightful Four-Inhumans-Silver Surfer-Galactus. I think it still holds up, though I admit I haven't read it in a while. The early early FF stuff is kind of lame, though. I much prefer the Spider-Man stories of the same era.
I started reading in the '70s and that's what I tend to read these days in Essentials or the like. I do prefer the stories I've read before so there is a bit of rose-colored glasses happening there. But for me the Marvel stuff is better reading than similar fare from DC Showcases, like JLA--those stories seem like they were meant to be read one per month and can't occupy me for a long plane ride like the Marvel stuff.
I've tried to read modern stuff with mixed results. I loved Astonishing X-Men, New Avengers, and Birds of Prey for a while, but then lost interest. Y The Last Man was a good one, and my current favorite is Invincible. The epic crossovers make my head hurt. I liked Identity Crisis and read all the preludes to Infinite Crisis but never finished Infinite itself.
I'll keep trying new stuff but will probably keep going back to the '70s.
I started reading in the '70s and that's what I tend to read these days in Essentials or the like. I do prefer the stories I've read before so there is a bit of rose-colored glasses happening there. But for me the Marvel stuff is better reading than similar fare from DC Showcases, like JLA--those stories seem like they were meant to be read one per month and can't occupy me for a long plane ride like the Marvel stuff.
I've tried to read modern stuff with mixed results. I loved Astonishing X-Men, New Avengers, and Birds of Prey for a while, but then lost interest. Y The Last Man was a good one, and my current favorite is Invincible. The epic crossovers make my head hurt. I liked Identity Crisis and read all the preludes to Infinite Crisis but never finished Infinite itself.
I'll keep trying new stuff but will probably keep going back to the '70s.
#43
DVD Talk Hero
Re: Not impressed with Marvel Comics(from the 1960s)
What Gruenwald did with his original Squadron Supreme was take already existing analogs of the Justice League (back then, marvel had the Squadron Supreme/Sinister as JLA analogs and the Imperial Guard as Legion of Superheroes analogs) and was able to play around in a sort of elseworlds story about what would happen if superheroes really wanted to take over the world to make it a better place. I loved it as a kid, and have that tpb somewhere with Gruenwald's ashes in it. But c'mon, you're going to tell me that Claremont's X-men run (Dark Phoenix, Days of Future Past, etc.), Simonson's Thor run, Frank Miller's Daredevil, Byrne's FF and Michelinie's Iron Man weren't great? I'd even include Stern's run on Avengers and ASM and Claremont's New Mutants. I can't be that blinded by nostalgia, can I?
#44
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Bay Area, California
Posts: 8,939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Not impressed with Marvel Comics(from the 1960s)
I still have all those key issues of FF. I sometimes like to pull stuff out just to look at them and I now find they were horribly written and drawn. Their a chore to read and really not that good. Most people see them through rose colored glasses and think their the best things ever to come out but honestly they don't hold up to the test of time. The later writers and artist that added onto the mythos are the ones that actually made the characters interesting. Saying that I love the fact I own a piece of comic book history.
#45
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 6,290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Not impressed with Marvel Comics(from the 1960s)
But c'mon, you're going to tell me that Claremont's X-men run (Dark Phoenix, Days of Future Past, etc.), Simonson's Thor run, Frank Miller's Daredevil, Byrne's FF and Michelinie's Iron Man weren't great? I'd even include Stern's run on Avengers and ASM and Claremont's New Mutants. I can't be that blinded by nostalgia, can I?
#46
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Bay Area, California
Posts: 8,939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Not impressed with Marvel Comics(from the 1960s)
I think much of our fondness of comic book runs come from liking the characters as kids. I'll rate Marvel over DC books because I've got a bigger childhood attachment to those characters. I'll probably rate a good Spiderman book over a great mutant title just from childhood affinity.
#47
Banned by request
Re: Not impressed with Marvel Comics(from the 1960s)
Supr: Comparing 60s Marvel to Sandman is a bit unfair. Sandman is probably one of the top 5 comics of all time in terms of literary merit. Saying the 60s marvel stuff falls short of that is like writing off Citizen Kane because the movies of the 40s don't stand up to the Godfather.
So let's be more fair and take Claremont's run on X-Men. Claremont brought a level of sophistication and emotional connection to the series that was thoroughly absent in the 60's run (imo). The obvious example is the Dark Phoenix Saga, but even beyond that Claremont really brought out a lot in the team. And if you're looking for good examples of ham-fisted writing in 60's titles, X-Men is full of it. I recall in one of the first issues, Jean Grey telling Professor X not to worry about the team going on a mission, and Xavier says to himself in a thought bubble, "As if I can't help but be worried about the woman I love! But I can never tell her how I feel!" I mean, come on, how corny can you get?
Another good example of how the writing got better after the 60's is Miller's run on Daredevil. The 60's comics were great for laying the foundation of what we know and love today, but the actual mechanics of the stories were often clunky, with cheesy dialogue that said too much in a medium where less is more.
Last edited by Supermallet; 10-12-10 at 01:54 PM.
#48
DVD Talk Hero
Re: Not impressed with Marvel Comics(from the 1960s)
I never cared for Dark Phoenix but loved Millers run on Daredevil.
I think much of our fondness of comic book runs come from liking the characters as kids. I'll rate Marvel over DC books because I've got a bigger childhood attachment to those characters. I'll probably rate a good Spiderman book over a great mutant title just from childhood affinity.
I think much of our fondness of comic book runs come from liking the characters as kids. I'll rate Marvel over DC books because I've got a bigger childhood attachment to those characters. I'll probably rate a good Spiderman book over a great mutant title just from childhood affinity.
I know this is switching conversation to the 80's, but DC was no slouch... I'm still a huge Teen Titans and Legion of Superheroes fan largely because of that era.
#49
Re: Not impressed with Marvel Comics(from the 1960s)
Your welcome. BTW, I noticed your from the Bay Area, too. You know of any good comic stores in your area that carry a good selection of GA, SA, or BA books? Thanks.
I love the TT, too. I have most of original series (60's) and every issue that Wolfman and Perez did. I thought it was an awesome run. I started losing interest a few issues after the Troia storyline. I completely gave it up when they started adding new members and started the team titans stories.
Did you ever notice that Rob Liefield stole the 2 page splash from #40 and put it in X-Force #1 and never gave credit to Perez? I know he did that a lot but this one was the most obvious.
As for the LSH my favorite runs were the Cockrum and later Grell issues in the 70's.
Did you ever notice that Rob Liefield stole the 2 page splash from #40 and put it in X-Force #1 and never gave credit to Perez? I know he did that a lot but this one was the most obvious.
As for the LSH my favorite runs were the Cockrum and later Grell issues in the 70's.
Last edited by mrhan; 10-12-10 at 02:30 PM.
#50
DVD Talk Hero
Re: Not impressed with Marvel Comics(from the 1960s)
I love the TT, too. I have most of original series (60's) and every issue that Wolfman and Perez did. I thought it was an awesome run I started losing interest a few issues after the Troia storyline. I completely gave it up when they started adding new members and started the team titans stories.