RKMBs Forums .::Robegories::. Comic Books Top 5 Comic Creators today

a counter to the "Worst" thread...

Who are the creators that you love enough that you are willing to give their stuff a try regardless of what it is?

Brubaker
Ennis
Rucka
Vaughn - Runaways; Y: The Last Man; Ex Machina; Pride of Baghdad - all have been entertaining and excellent...
Bendis

Kirkman; Simone; Millar and Straszynski get honorable mention...

brubaker

dini

bendis

millar


and David Peterson is my fifth

damn, I forgot aboput him,.,,he's great too.




who? what has he done? name doesn't ring a bell...


also, forgot to mention PAD...shit, maybe I shoulda made this a top ten list...

he did a mini series called mouse guard that suprised me. Hes just begun on volume 2.

Brian Michael Bendis

Ed Brubaker

Grant Morrison

Peter David

Bill Keane

Yeah, there's a beautiful hardcover out for Mouse Guard: Fall 1152 but the next mini, MG: Winter 1152 is running late. The first issue shipped a month late, and #2 (solicitted in July) still hasn't hit the shelves yet.

i know...

Brent Anderson
Tom Mandrake
Terry Moore
Peter David
Brian K. Vaughn

Peter David (guys been doing good work for 20 years now)
Bendis
Vaughn
Warren Ellis
Mike Carey

Writer/Artists
Mike Mignola
Eric Powell
Darwyn Cooke
Dan Brereton

Writers
Warren Ellis
Peter David
Jim Krueger
Joe Casey (Jers is too young to know good writing. )
B. Clay Moore

Artists
Scott Kolins
Kyle Hotz
Tim & Joe Vigil
Frank Espinosa (sp?)
John Cassaday
Alex Maleev
Bryan Hitch
(more than five, piss off.)

I was struggling to think of a fifth, but thanks to Grimm I remembered Joe Casey (not to be confused with Joe Kelly).

Joe Casey (Godland, The Intimates)
Darwyn Cooke (The Spirit)
Joss Whedon (Buffy, Runaways)
Brian K. Vaughn (Ex Machina, Runaways, Buffy)
Grant Morrison (Grant Morrison)

Vaughn's writing Buffy now?

He's writing an arc about Faith, while Whedon writes his own arc in Runaways. Vaughn's superheroey side is actually pretty close in style to Whedon's work, so you can barely tell that they switched places.

Relative to what was published 20 years ago, no one qualifies.

But I still like work by:

Mike Mignola
Arthur Adams
Mark Waid
Alan Moore
Adam Hughes
Ian Churchill
Frank Quitely
Michael Turner
Kyle Hotz
Alan Davis
Scott Kolins
Carlos Pacheco
John Cassaday
Peter David
Mark Evanier
Sergio Aragones
J.M DeMatteis
Kevin Maguire
Barry Kitson

and a few others. But I can't remember the last time I was really excited about a series, and couldn't wait to read the new issue every month. The last two that approached that were Waid/Kitson's LEGION (the first few issues), and the YOUNG AVENGERS on the Marvel side.
So aside from some nice art and a decent issue here and there, I'd say no one qualifies.

You say "no one qualifies" in a Top Five Best Creators of Today, yet you give a nineteen-person list of current creators...

Well, I thought I said it above, but if I was unclear, these are creators that I think are capable of good work that I watch, but I don't think they've done a good satisfying and complete story in a long time. Generally, I've purchased books with nice art, but with really lame and disappointing writing that kills it cold.

As I've said for a long time, there's a writing crisis in comics, and I'm tired of purchasing 22 pages of pinups disguised as a story, or a one-issue story that's been stretched over 6 issues to fill a trade.

One of the last I read that was halfway interesting was one of your recommendations, a LOKI hardcover by Robert Rodi and some guy who did painted art that looks like John Bolton. It was better than the standard fare, but still felt incomplete to me. I really miss reading the last page of a story and thinking "Wow, that was great!"

Some issues that come to mind that fill the bill:

• LEGION (4th series) 49 (Matter-eater Lad solo story, very funny!)
  
  ABRAHAM STONE # 1 (Marvel, 1995, by Joe Kubert)
  
  The last few issues of Bud Root's CAVE WOMAN: PANGAEAN SEA.
  
  The first 5 trades of HELLBOY stories by Mignola (before he started farming the work out to less inspired creators)
  
  BATMAN/TARZAN by Ron Marz and Igor Kordey
  
  SOJOURN by Ron Marz and Greg Land
  
  SILVER SURFER: PARABLE by Stan Lee and Moebius
  
  CONAN THE ADVENTURER 1, by Roy Thomas and Rafael Kayanan
  
  And the other two series I listed above, early issues of YOUNG AVENGERS and Waid/Kitson LEGION

Someone's trapped in the past.

Glad you enjoyed Loki, though. Shame you didn't get the same "meat" out of it that I did. I thought it was a far better book than a lot of what was put out twenty-years ago...

better than a lot of old stuff, better than a lot of new stuff. there's crap in every era.

It's not a matter of being "trapped in the past". It's a matter of reading the current material, recognizing it for the substandard re-tread that it is (mediocre at best), and knowing that the best material was done 20 years ago by a superior generation of creators.
I've gone through my recommended list many times (Michelinie/Romita Jr/Layton IRON MAN, Claremont/Byrne and Claremont/Paul Smith X-MEN, Simonson's THOR, Byrne FF, Levitz/Giffen LEGION, Stern/Romita Jr. AMAZING SPIDERMAN, Stern DOCTOR STRANGE, Starlin, Thomas, Russell, Conrad, Claremont, Bolton and others in EPIC ILLUSTRATED, Alan Moore's WATCHMEN, MIRACLEMAN, V FOR VENDETTA and SWAMP THING, Miller's DAREDEVIL, DARK KNIGHT RETURNS, and BATMAN: YEAR ONE, Englehart/Rogers DETECTIVE, etc.)

Again, a lot of good art in the more recent past, but very little even functionally decent writing over the last 15 years or so. None of which measures up to the best work of Moore and Miller at their peak in the mid/late 1980s.

Granted, there's a lot of crap in any era. But there was a far higher ratio of great material to balance out the crap, before 1990.

Maybe once or twice a year, I read a few issues of a series that I halfway like. But there is no sustained quality, as there was in a better era.


I'm not going to praise Jeph Loeb and Jim Lee as if they were the same quality as O'Neil/Adams or Englehart/Rogers. Loeb/Lee is shit. Loeb/Sale is shit. Saying that the older material is better is just an aesthetic fact, recognizing the difference between good and bad material.

The only other title I find somewhat enjoyable right now is the Morrison/Quitely SUPERMAN title. But it, again, is a re-tread, that swipes ideas from a better era. And if not for the beautiful art and colors, I wouldn't waste my time with the story. At its very best, I still prefer the earlier (more original, superior) material.

Morrison's JLA
Planetary
Sandman
Lucifer
Carey's Hellblazer run
Ennis' Hellblazer run
Preacher
Death of Superman storyline
Waid's Flash
Peyer's Hourman
Starman
Young Justice
Peter David's Hulk run
Peter David's Supergirl run
Peter David's Aquaman run
Jurgen's JLA
Knightfall storyline

The 1990's had a lot of incredible series and runs. Much better in terms of writing and art than the 1980's. While their were a lot of crossovers, it's still better to have a few events each year that eat up a month than the constant unending storyline crossovers DC and Marvel now do.

no, it's an *opinion*. I do like much of what you listed in your post, as I also like much of what Ray just listed in his, but there's also stuff in both posts that I don't like. that makes an *opinion*, not a fact.

it's your opinion that the quality of work years ago was much better, as it's Ray's opinion that Kirby sucks. but that's all they are, opinions.

Agreed. Saying that the creators from twenty-years ago are "superior" to the current crop, and stating that it's a "fact" just cements the idea that you are not open to enjoying anything modern. Thus, my original comment...you are trapped in the past. Personally, I'm sorry you cannot find enjoyment in today's comics. Like everything, it ebbs and flows. Within the past year or two, it's seemed to ebb. But, before that, it flowed with wondrous books and concepts, just as it will again sometime in the next few years...

Since taste in entertainment is a subjective thing and not a science, I'd have to say that, yeah, to a large degree, what one finds to be of the best quality is a matter of individual taste, and is opinion.
As you say. It's not an exact science.

But since I still read the current material and give it a chance, I don't think you can fairly say I'm "trapped in the past", Pro.
I read both.
I often re-read my favorites, and I find the more recent material to be lacking in the ways I described.
The new work takes a one-issue story and stretch it over 6 issues. The current writing lacks the characterization and sophistication of earlier 70's and 80's work.
The current material is also much more dark and cynical, which is the major cause of my distaste for the new books.

Some of that is opinion, some of what I list are objective reasons to not like the new material.

And I seriously doubt anyone who has read the current work and such classics as Moore's WATCHMEN, MIRACLEMAN, SWAMP THING, V FOR VENDETTA, or Miller's BATMAN YEAR ONE and DAREDEVIL: BORN AGAIN, Goodwin/Simonson MANHUNTER, Wein/Wrightson SWAMP THING, Englehart/Rogers DETECTIVE, or O'Neil/Adams BATMAN and DETECTIVE, would see the more recent work as the same level of quality.

There is a level of characterization, complexity, sophistication and prose that the fanboyish new material just tries to regurgitate with a new twist. Or bluff its way into appearing sophisticated with crude attempts at shock-value and "adult" themes, using crutches like graphic violence, heavy profanity, or other "extreme" tricks.
As opposed to the solid prose and storytelling of an earlier era. Now it's all about posturing toughness and big explosions.
I miss the era where I actually cared about the characters I was reading about.

I've listed examples, past and present.

Agreed. But, that's not all titles, everywhere. There are exceptions to that rule.



Disagreed.

You're telling me a pleasant 80's run of Detective Comics is more sophisticated that Neil Gaiman's Sandman, Books of Magic, Busiek & Pacheco's Arrowsmith, or even Darwyn Cooke's New Frontier? You're mad.



You say that...and I've heard you say it many times before...and you also say this:



Yet, I think you're simply generalizing an entire generation of comics because a few left a bad taste in your mouth. I mean, The Authority? Transmetropolitan? Preacher? Yeah, I can see a lot of stuff from Vertigo and Wildstorm fitting something of that bill. But, you can't tell me everything in the current industry has "adult themes, graphic violence, and heavy profanity". In fact, I can't name a single mainstream book that really has ANY of that. So, I think you're just assuming it's all like one base, generic image that you've created to justify your dismissal of an entire era of comics that don't give you the nostalgia kick you crave.

Either way, though, you say that you are turned off by books with "adult themes, graphic violence, heavy profanity", and yet here's the list you cite as being "approved" by you:



Are you trying to tell me those books aren't "cynical" with "graphic violence and profanity"? Come on.



I'm not saying you're completely wrong, mind you. I just find your reasoning flawed. I also don't believe that there is nothing as "sophisticated" as twenty-year-old Detective Comics, and the like. I just think you're really shooting yourself in the foot by missing out on some of the really good stuff of the modern comic era.

But, each their own, I guess...

I've read each one of those comics, yet I can honestly say that I'm constantly amazed by new stuff. Last week I discovered The Umbrella Academy, a new twist on the superteam concept, a brilliant book that I'm guessing you'd dismiss at first sight for being "cynical".

I used to feel the same way you do about modern comics. When I was 12. Superman went electric and it seemed like everything was pointless shit. I was ready to quit comics and get a life, but then I accidentally discovered Mike Allred's Madman and WHOA, I realized there was fantastic stuff out there, I just wasn't looking in the right place.

The biggest advantage modern comics have over every other previous era, is precisely the fact that all those eras are avaliable for new creators to draw from. They can take the best of each period and leave behind the bad, like Allred did Madman or Morrison is doing in ASS. Of course most people don't know how to take advantage of this, but the few that do make it worth it.

I think that's a damn good point. The Dirty Dozen isn't a bad movie because it uses war movie conventions but then puts a darker twist on them. It's good because of those things. Each generation of a medium is a process of learning and building and improving.

The list I see quoted from Dave is a little heavy handed. It'd be like some chick showing me her engagement ring and then me pulling out the Cullinan Diamond and start comparing the two. I could just as easily pull out a bunch of bad Silver Age comics and compare them to New Frontier, Red Son, Planetary, Bone, or Peter David's run on damn near everything. It's not that the Silver Age was a better ear of comics. It's just a better era of giving you what Dave wants (whether that be style of story, escapism, or nostalgia, I don't know). For that reason, he's more willing to overlook or all out ignore the shit that came from that era as well.

Pariah nerdy Moderator Don't mind him. He used to be an Irishman.
15000+ posts Fri Jul 18 2008 11:18 PM Viewing a list of posts
Forum: PJP's Random Chat and Insurgency Roast

I didn't rush to answer the points of yours and Mxy's, because I've already answered these same points probably hundreds of times on this forum and the DC boards. And you could just look those previous answers up and see your questions have already been answered, over and over.



Sure there are. But they are so rare in the last 10-15 years, I rarely find them worth the bother to seek out.
I prefer to buy back issues from an era with a far higher ratio of quality, that far less often disappoints.

I often feel ripped off when I take a chance on the new-era material.




"Mad?"

What, are you British now?

Ive read every one of the series you list, and found them all dull, pretentious and substandard. I've described in detail my distaste for SANDMAN's overblown mediocrity on many occasions.

• (one example: )
  WTF topic, page 6
  

Again, just take a look at what I said in the above linked post, and my post that directly precedes it, and see that this has already been answered, in these and many others of my posts here:

• WTF topic, page 6
  
  WTF topic, page 5

While I praise Moore and Miller's mid-1980's work as a high-water mark in comics storytelling, I express reservations about the darkness of it, and express a preference for earlier work by others I specifically listed that I have no reservations about.

And I note that Moore and Miller themselves acknowledge that their works are dark, and that their works were a catalyst for wide imitation, that has brought on a prevalent dark age in comics.





Again, I do buy about 30-50 new books in any given year, sometimes more, but am overwhelmingly disappointed with the new work and often feel like I've wasted my money.
So I spend much more on back issues of the previous and better eras.

As I've clarified, repeatedly.

I've clarified that Moore and Miller represent the high-water mark of comics storytelling, despite their darker elements I have reservations about, and that despite their aesthetic quality, the darkness of their works makes me prefer and more often re-read the arguably less sophisticated earlier work (which I listed examples of, at length).

Less sophisticated in some ways, but more sophisticated than the new work in other ways.
Less padded, more character-driven, arguably more sincere, arguably more tightly scripted, definitely less profanity-laden and less cynical.

Other sophisticated works, such as Dave Sim's CEREBUS, and McGregor/Russell's KILLRAVEN, I have no such reservations about.

Other examples I've often listed as rare examples of quality in the modern era include:
HELLBOY
LEAVE IT TO CHANCE
YOUNG AVENGERS
SOJOURN
GROO


You keep trying to sweep me into a dismissive category as "rejecting everything new", when I've made clear that while I do recognize new material of high quality occasionally appears, it is so rare now that I seldom find it worth the time and effort to seek out.
I find the other stuff, and other forms of entertainment, a more fulfilling use of my time.

So you didn't rush to answer the questions but over a year later you felt the need? Dude are you on drugs?

Just happened to run across the topic, and figured I'd answer.

Alan Moore interview, COMIC BOOK ARTIST # 9, published in 2001

CBA: But you were able to purge yourself pretty quick, right [of the urge to write superhero stories, after WATCHMEN concluded in 1988] ? You didn't write that many, maybe four or five Superman stories? [SUPERMAN 423, ACTION 583, SUPERMAN ANNUAL 11, DC PRESENTS 85]

ALAM MOORE: And that was enough. Those were ones I wanted to write, but since then, most characters have changed so much that they no longer feel to me like the characters I knew. So, I wouldn't have that kind of nostalgic interest in those sort of characters anymore. At the time, I was also saying I didn't feel that if there was some strong political message I wanted to get over, probably super-hero comics were not the best place to do it. If I wanted to do stuff about the environment, that there didn't need to be a swamp monster there, for instance. When I did Brought to Light, about the CIA activities in World War II, that story would not have been greatly enhanced by a guy with his underwear outside his trousers, you know. And also, there did seem to be a rash of quite heavy, frankly depressing and overtly pretentious super-hero comics that came out in the wake of Watchmen, and I felt to some degree responsible for bringing in a fairly morbid Dark Age. Perhaps I over-burdened the super-hero, made it carry a lot more meaning than the form was ever designed for. So, for a while, I went off to do stuff that was very non-super-hero, and going into other areas I was interested in.

Ya know what, Wonder Boy has been posting on these boards since 2001, and I dont think I have ever read past the first line of any of his posts!

You ain't missing anything.


Unless you like reading the words of a deeply disturbed person.

What I generally read is "What I think about comics is...blah blah blah blah blah *insert picture* blah blah blah blah *insert picture* blah blah...."

I think thats enough!

his posts in the political forum are pure comedy gold. He's just as bad as the insurgency.

The jobless sock-fucking social misfit has a problem with the way I post.

Now that's funny.





Sorry you don't like my posts, Nowhereman. I just talk about what interests me, like eveyone else here. Although I recall having a number of friendly exchanges with you in the past.

Another thing, if you say something that is true that he doesn't like he calls you names.

He's also g-mans personal sperm bank.