Make a bold statement about comics
 

Riffing off the existing threads in movies, music, and video games. Say something that goes against the grain of public opinion.

E.g., "Rob Liefeld is the supreme visionary in modern comics."

And.. go.

Re: Make a bold statement about comics
 

Mark Waid is an overrated writer.

Re: Make a bold statement about comics
 

The target audience of superhero comics is 12-24 year old males. Everyone I've met who was still reading lots of comics at age 45 (or later) was a little bit creepy.

Re: Make a bold statement about comics
 

Jack Kirby is way over-praised as an artist. While I can appreciate his sense of design and innovation with the early Marvel universe, I find his figures to be blocky, his anatomy to be simplistic, and his ability to have his characters express emotion is limited. He also tended to have characters overuse certain poses and gestures. And, lawd, did anyone draw uglier women?

Re: Make a bold statement about comics
 

The new 52 is the best thing that DC ever did. The new origins are awesome. We should totally forget everything that came before because it was all shit.

Re: Make a bold statement about comics
 

The comic book industry will be dead in 30 years. The average comic book reader is in his 30s now. There isn't enough young people picking up the hobby to keep the industry afloat once the current generation of 30-somethings get old and begin dying off.

Superheroes will live on in movies and TV, but the actual superhero comic book is going to die. We are seeing the beginning of that transition now with the abundance of comic related movies and TV series.

Re: Make a bold statement about comics
 

This might have been true...thirty years ago. DC Comics found their average buyer is something like a 34-year-old male. Marvel Comics does skew a little younger, but not by much. This was market research done just a couple of years ago.

Re: Make a bold statement about comics
 

:up:

Re: Make a bold statement about comics
 

So my take on the concept of the "bold statement" thing is that we're not just making up crazy things, but saying what we honestly feel even if we may be in the minority.

Right?

Re: Make a bold statement about comics
 

I used to fully believe this, but browsing comic shops lately there are a ton of kiddie books on prominent display. Hopefully they sell well and it's not just a local thing.

Re: Make a bold statement about comics
 

1965-1968 Marvels were the best superhero comics ever produced.

Re: Make a bold statement about comics
 

The single issue comic book format is shit and should be done away with except for the rarest of circumstances.

I know "one shot," "stand alone" or "done in one" issues still exist, and that's fine and they have their place.

But for the most part issues are tying together for 5, 6, 7+ issue arcs that can easily be bundled into trades. That's the only way you get anything resembling a complete or near-complete story these days. Even then it often takes two trades worth of material to finish stories.

I mean, could you imagine reading a prose book a chapter at a time, one chapter a month, for 6 months to a year and still not be done with the story? It's kind of insane to think about.

And very rarely are single issue comic books in a multi-issue arc written to a level that they're satisfying as a stand alone work and also as part of that arc.

From a creative and literary standpoint, the format is awful and should be done away with.

But the industry's financing practices are extremely reliant on single issue sales, especially to predict how to handle trade releases. Since I'm basically advocating for a "graphic novel" book format for 90% of titles out there, they'd have to change their whole approach to financing these projects.

The other problem is, in 120ish pages or whatever it may be, stories are still super decompressed and you can tear through a whole trade in an hour or so. Writers need to tighten up their stuff for the books to be worthwhile. They need to pack more meaningful story and developments into those pages.

Re: Make a bold statement about comics
 

I think the single issue model also reflects the practical reality of how artists work. People do not want to wait nine months while an artist knocks out 12 issues. You also lose feedback from the audience in the creative process. Most writers now aim at 6-12 issues per planned arc. I yearn for the days when a good story could be told in a single issue.

Re: Make a bold statement about comics
 

Some old stories went too quickly while many new ones are insanely padded or use too many huge panels that are not required. I do take my time yet some can be burned through far too fast.

Or even two or three issues at times. For some reason they think everything has to be at least six issues long.

Re: Make a bold statement about comics
 

Golden Age comics suck. The art is static and the story lines are often silly and simplistic. If it weren't for the fact that many of these issues include the first appearances of certain heroes and villains, no one would care about them.

Re: Make a bold statement about comics
 

This is just plain wrong. If those old comics truly sucked, then Batman and Superman wouldn't even exist today. If they sucked, they wouldn't have lasted for going on 80 years now.

There is a difference between something being bad and just being dated. Those old comics are certainly not bad. They are just very very very dated. Stan Lee's writing is the same way. It's dated as heck and a chore to read those 60s Marvel comics now. They're not bad though. They're just very dated.

It also amuses me when people complain about story decompression and comics were soooooo much better when there was more text. The thing these people forget is there was so much text because the majority of it was overly redundant exposition.

For example, a Stan Lee comic would have art of Doc Ock punching Spidey. There would be a text box saying Doc Ock is punching Spidey. Doc Ock would have a dialogue box saying he is punching Spidey. Spidey would have thought bubbles saying he is being punched by Doc Ock.

It was ridiculously redundant. Modern comics are decompressed because they cut out all that redundancy.

Re: Make a bold statement about comics
 

I went back and re read the OPs original post....I believe it states that we should say something opposite general opinions. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Anyways, I hate the new 52. A friend gave me a shitload of his extra copies; I couldn't get through them... utter crap. I actually liked the post crisis (1986) stuff but this new 52 is really, really bad. Why does everything look like Jim Lee art? Sure, he is a competent artist but nothing more.

DC is shit now...I am sticking to what I know and grew up with; the bronze age. Best versions ever...at least the late 60's and early 70's. That's my honest opinion.

Re: Make a bold statement about comics
 

Yep, it should be something against the grain but that we actually believe.

I found the "sucks vs. dated" argument interesting. I like the concept of Golden Age better than I actually like reading it, and find the '60s Stan Lee stuff kind of annoying as well because of the massive text. So I guess it sucks for the modern reader, but didn't suck at the time. It was groundbreaking for its time. So dated is probably a better term.

Re: Make a bold statement about comics
 

Golden Age comics can tell a complete story in 7-9 pages that would take 6 issues now.

Kirby was not a good artist.

Stan Lee was not a good writer.

The Marvel style of heroes with problems is boring. I don't care that Peter cant pay the rent. If I want real life, I'll look around.

Re: Make a bold statement about comics
 

Yes, they are dated but innovative. The bulk of good stories came in the 70's and 80's from Marvel, DC and a handful of independents.

Re: Make a bold statement about comics
 

I think the confusion comes from your example, which is a statement only one person in the entire world truly believes.

For doing away with floppies: not only would the reader have to wait for 12 months for the story, during which time they would no doubt lose interest, but the writer/artist would have to wait just as long. This probably works better if the talent was top tier (I'm sure Neil Gaiman could get away with this) but otherwise I'm not sure if it would work. Does Europe do mostly GNs? I know Japan is the exact opposite, weekly chunks of comics with almost instant feedback from the fans, but that's a breakneck pace that I doubt would work here (and anthologies don't seem to do well either).

Re: Make a bold statement about comics
 

Marvel and DC writers have admitted they are instructed to write story arcs meant for trade paperbacks of 6-7 issues. The monthly issue is not their focus anymore. If the story ends in one issue, it doesn't force the reader to get the next issue.

The big two don't want casual comic book readers. Their entire business models are now built around diehards that buy every single issue of a certain character.

Re: Make a bold statement about comics
 

Meh. Dated, suck, boring... all the same in my book. I've tried to read some "classics" from the era but find them excruciating.

Re: Make a bold statement about comics
 

One of my retirement projects will be to dig out my huge collection of '60s and '70s Marvel Comics and thumb through them to see how well they hold up and decide whether to sell them or not. (My daughter sees them as her legacy but if I need the money after I retire, they're going!)

Re: Make a bold statement about comics
 

Sorry, I figured everyone was familiar with the concept from the other threads so pretty much threw away the example. :down:

Re: Make a bold statement about comics
 

Digital on a decent tablet is a much more convenient way to collect comics... but if it ever truly takes off it will kill the market.

The caveat being "on a decent tablet." I have no idea how some of you can continue to collect floppies and accumulate boxes and boxes of comics. Even switching to tpbs and hardcovers only, which allows for a more organized reading experience, fills up bookshelves eventually. Having it all available digitally is great (the one exception being double paged spreads, of course). You even cut out a substantial cost of printing and shipping physical copies, so there is room for a discount.

However, if it ever takes off it'll kill the industry? Why? It will kill the local comic store. That's why there's not a more substantial discount for digital over physical. Already mailorder places with steep discounts are undercutting comic stores (and apparently Marvel's official response to the high prices of tpbs is to buy at a discount). Now the LCBS might be a place that "normal" people dread entering, but without it, and the (hopefully) helpful staff, how do you find out about other comics that might interest you? How do you get others interested at all without a physical storefront (not that there are many new readers, but certainly stuff like the new 52 brought in some)?

Usually, I only buy stuff in Comixology because I know I'll like it, or because it's on sale and I do some research on it. It doesn't do a great job of letting me know what else I might like. Now I'm weird and go through Diamond Previews on a monthly basis, but otherwise, if you're not doing that or closely following the comic book industry, there's nothing like going to the comic store on release week and seeing what's new and what cover might catch your eye. Comixology has something like that but it's not the same.

But heck, maybe the digital youth already have this figured out. Me, I still mainly know what's coming out on DVD and Blu through the ads in the Sunday newspaper.

The other thing that digital does is encourage waiting. This is like the antithesis of what mainstream comics are: get you hooked on a story on a week to week basis, to the point that by the time you realize that this Superman creative team sucks, well, there's a new creative team on the horizon and you've already bought all 400 previous issues so stick it out with us. Besides, if you miss this month, the issue will be gone and you'll have to wait for the trade. There is no scarcity with digital, so there's not necessarily an urgency to buy, except for those few outstanding series that you just can't wait for. And there's always the possibility of a sale. So if I already have a backlog, and I can buy this anytime I want and maybe even cheaper, maybe I won't buy it until the reviews are in, or until I see how long this new "big shakeup" really lasts (spoiler alert: usually less than 6 months), or whatever.

Re: Make a bold statement about comics
 

You know what, I hate the new 52, and I know you're not serious about this, but:

DC needed the new 52 relaunch to survive. And it worked.

Let me first list the things I hated about the new 52: They threw away decades of history, often throwing away everything we know or recognize about a character except the name and (sometimes) likeness. Example: turning the JSA from an older, legacy based team to a bunch of newbies on a parallel Earth. Because of the emphasis on deaging the main characters, they threw away most if not all of the 2nd generation and younger superheroes, especially if a 3rd generation existed, which mainly means the Teen Titans got screwed over. They are so steeped in editorial edict that it often seems like creators don't really have say in what's going on, and where Marvel really promotes their creators, DC treats them as almost interchangeable. They cancelled several books that were on the upswing with the reboot (Brian Q. Miller on Steph/Batgirl, Teen Titans, Lemire's Superboy, heck even Supergirl was finally getting decent).

But I can't deny that the majority of their titles, especially some of their high profile characters, were flailing. JSA had no direction. The James Robinson Justice League run, plagued by editorial interference, was downright terrible. Superman had been weakened by New Krypton but JMS's run was even worse. JMS "reinvented" Wonder Woman but didn't do much to budge sales. The only things going well were Morrison's Batman and John's Green Lantern and the related titles, which is why they kept them. And apparently there was an edict from on high that things needed to turn around.

I'll be frank, when they switched it gave me the perfect excuse to leave floppies behind, because these weren't the characters I knew and I had no attachment to them. So I gave up on them. But for every disgusted older fan, there were older fans who bought in, and newer fans who jumped on. From a sales standpoint, they've seemed to improve a ton. Now, of course, much like Marvel's Ultimate universe the new 52 universe is becoming pretty convoluted and tough for a new person to jump aboard, but apparently they hooked enough new fish to make it work.

Re: Make a bold statement about comics
 

I largely agree that death of the local comic book shop will have devastating consequences for the industry. The bigger heroes will survive but books with smaller followings will get killed off very quickly. It is why Marvel and DC have treaded very carefully into the digital age. They have the most to lose with the complete loss of local stores, as their secondary heroes would quickly get lost in the shuffle.

As for the New 52, I had no problem with the idea of a DC reboot. I don't think it was a very organic process, rushed by corporate overlords that demanded a boost to flagging sales. I was hoping for more of a send-off than Flashpoint to the old Universe. They've admitted that Flashpoint was not originally intended to be the end, it was just another crossover that got changed when DiDio's job started getting threatened.

A reboot was probably necessary to clean out a lot of the deadwood that had accumulated. I don't think they had a very strong long-term creative vision. Apparently Warner wanted Jim Lee to design "new" outfits for future entertainment products, resulting in a redesigned Justice League intended for movies. Probably the best move was splitting up Clark Kent and Lois Lane.

Re: Make a bold statement about comics
 

The Dark Knight Returns sucks.

Re: Make a bold statement about comics
 

Superheroes in space simply doesn't interest me in the least.

Re: Make a bold statement about comics
 

I strongly agree with this. I like that I can keep hundreds or thousand of comics in something the size of a dime (when they can be downloaded) I no longer have any interest in having dozens of boxes cluttering up my house plus digital is easier to read for me as with regular comics I always want to be so careful and have one place to read them while a tablet I can hold anyway.

That would be one of mine. I don't really care for older comics (40-60's etc..) I have often hear about stories be told fast and then you read and find out why. Sometimes things happen to quickly while today it's often too slow.

Not a huge fan of older art styles either, I prefer more modern comic art.

That's kind of how I am with entertainment. I'm not watching movies, tv, reading comics for people to have the same insane issues for thirty years (our time) maybe at first it was fine yet after enough time it was something that needed to go away.

Re: Make a bold statement about comics
 

The Dark Knight Returns might have been great for it's time, but as someone who read it as a kid in the 90's it wasn't anything special. Still don't think it's particularly great now even understanding some of the themes better; and the art work sucks.

For all the hate that comic book fans seem to have for the 90's and the "extreme" antics from publishers, story arcs like the death of Superman, Batman's broken back, Wolverine's adamantium getting pulled, etc were fun and entertaining.

Aquaman sucks, and talking to fish is a terrible power.

Re: Make a bold statement about comics
 

o no you dit-ten!

http://i61.tinypic.com/f9p4aw.png

Re: Make a bold statement about comics
 

Fun and entertaining is one thing. Their quality can be another.

I enjoy those today, the ones mentioned, except for death of Supes. But their quality is pretty rough if you take yourself out of nostalgia.

Re: Make a bold statement about comics
 

Out of curiosity, how old are you Ash?

Re: Make a bold statement about comics
 

I enjoy them still, and it has nothing to do with nostalgia (having read Knightfall and posted about it here a few years ago). I don't think the quality is rough at all, and fun and entertaining is exactly what I expect to get out of comic book stories.

Re: Make a bold statement about comics
 

The Dark Knight is what actually got me into comic books. I had read comic books as a passing hobby as a kid. I'd buy one or two at the convenience store on a long ride for example. But my 16 year-old self found the Dark Knight moving. I loved it then and I love it now - almost 30 years later.

While I can't stand to reread any of the Image stuff from that time, I just reread the Death of Superman and it held up pretty well. The issue where he dies where him and Doomsday are just pounding on each other so hard that windows are breaking is still pretty bad ass.

And while I've never much liked Aquaman, the New 52 revamp has been pretty damn good.

Re: Make a bold statement about comics
 

Dark Knight defintely holds up for me, perhaps the best story and artwork of the genre IMHO.

Death of Superman will probably hold up for me too, but then again, I grew up a DC fanboy.

Re: Make a bold statement about comics
 

Hey, they wouldn't be bold statements if everyone agreed with them :) :shrug:

Re: Make a bold statement about comics
 

Not a bold statement. Though mentally raping fish is also a terrible power.

Similar to Kirby, I never really liked Frank Miller's art style, even though I recognize his skill and use of blacks. But heck, it took me a while to appreciate Mignola as well, so what do I know.

Ok, another one, and I'll try my best not to sound like a shill:

The best value in comics today is... Weekly Shonen Jump (american version).

Basically, Viz decided a couple of years ago that they wanted to publish something similar to how they publish things in Japan. Basically, in Japan artists work in cramped studios releasing 20 pages of story and art in black and white on a weekly basis (there are various schedules; some like Attack on Titan are monthly). Weekly Shonen Jump in Japan is a phonebook-sized anthology of these stories, and every week they're ranked against each other in reader polls. Drop down in the polls too low for a few weeks and you run the risk of cancellation. The release schedule plus the threat of cancellation means that oftentimes good artists create stuff that just doesn't last beyond a few months, but sometimes it creates works that are fast paced and always on their toes. WSJ is basically a comics magazine for young boys, and where Dragonball, Yu Yu Hakusho, Naruto, Bleach, etc. are/were serialized.

The American version doesn't quite reach the page count of the Japanese version, and is only available digitally, but for 26 bucks a year (now 20 with discount), you get basically 250 pages of manga, a week after it's released in Japan, week in and week out (except Japanese holidays, so 48 weeks a year). This currently includes Bleach (ending soon), Naruto (ending in a month), One Piece, Toriko, and a bunch of others.

Ok, I sound like a shill. There are flaws: the weekly installments are in one chunk so it's difficult if you want to, say, go back and read all of One Piece in that format. It's digital only. While manga has pretty broad parameters, these all belong to a similar niche (most are fighting manga with one romance/harem). The Viz app, while vastly improved, still hangs at times. You can't download the manga, you have to download it into the app from their servers. They've been running a "rerun" of Death Note in there, I think because they haven't been able to fill the page count, and it'll only get worse without Naruto. You'll enter in medias res and either have to buy the graphic novels to catch up, or catch up on your own. But it almost completely scratches my itch of wanting to read something on a regular basis.