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

Strawman!

Well, he likes Watchmen, a story that involves a superhero raping a teammate and murdering a pregnant woman in cold blood (then again, she was only Vietnamese). In the early 80's Moore wrote a Miracleman comic in which his sidekick is raped by other teens, who he punishes with gruesome and graphic deaths. I haven't seen WB complain about that either.

So, as I've said before, I think this is a case of Wondy getting old and, well, doing what old people do best: cry about what young people like.

Well, opinions vary on that.

I think the work of Moore, Morrison, Gaiman and Miller, even from the 80's, are pretty dark.





The stories of Moore and Miller are multi-layered, and have bright moments, and redeem themselves beyond their darkness by having something meaningful to say, but are still unmistakeably dark.

Rorschach in the WATCHMEN "The Abyss Gazes Also" chapter... I don't think there's a bright way to interpret that.
Alan Moore in a COMICS JOURNAL interview (issue 138) said it depressed him deeply to crawl inside the mind of Rorschach to fully flesh out the character in this chapter.




And as I said on the previous page, Moore said in a COMIC BOOK ARTIST interview that himself and others had unwittingly brought about a Dark Age in comics with their 1980's work, and that he was attempting to bring back an optimism and upbeat heroism that had been lost, when he created new titles like TOM STRONG and other ABC titles.

[ COMIC BOOK ARTIST # 9, August 2000, in an issue on Charleton characters and creators, pages 108-109. ]





Miller's work, from RONIN forward, is deeply cynical, and arguably paranoid in its portrayal of government. DARK KNIGHT RETURNS, DARK KNIGHT STRIKES BACK, GIVE ME LIBERTY, SIN CITY, ELECKTRA:ASSASSIN and HARD BOILED being prime examples.





I could find a few stories in Gaiman's SANDMAN that are upbeat (issue 50 in particular) but mostly I just found it very somber and morose. I read the first four trades and scattered issues after, and fail to see what people rave about. It's not horrible, but it's far from the best I've seen in comics.




I personally despise Morrison's works, although there are a few Morrison stories I somewhat like conceptually, although I find his work likewise pretentious, and (Gaiman-like ) full of quickie references to literature characters without really fleshing them out in his stories beyond the slightest cameo-reference, so I constantly envision Morrison musing to himself (and Gaiman as well) : Ah, look how clever I am to know this !
I'm not impressed.





All that said, if I were to recommend to someone some of the best written and illustrated comic series of the last 40 years, I would name at the top of the list Moore's SWAMP THING, MIRACLEMAN, V FOR VENDETTA, WATCHMEN, and SUPERMAN: WHAT EVER HAPPENED TO THE MAN OF TOMORROW.

And also Miller's DAREDEVIL, BATMAN: THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS, and BATMAN: YEAR ONE.

Nothing by Morrison or Gaiman, despite some decent stories, would make my list though.

But because these above series are dark works, I have a much greater fondness for:

• Wein/Wrightson SWAMP THING 1-10 (DARK GENESIS trade)
• Joe Kubert's TARZAN 207-235
• Goodwin/Simonson MANHUNTER
• Jack Kirby's FOREVER PEOPLE, NEW GODS, MISTER MIRACLE, JIMMY OLSEN, KAMANDI, and O.M.A.C.
• O'Neil/Adams DETECTIVE (just out in hardcover) and BATMAN
• O'Neil/Kaluta THE SHADOW
• Englehart/Perez and Shooter/Perez AVENGERS 141-178, and Michelinie/Byrne AVENGERS 181-191
• Englehart/Rogers Batman in DETECTIVE 471-476 (reprinted in the BATMAN:STRANGE APPARITIONS trade)
• Michelinie/Romita Jr/Layton IRON MAN 115-156
• McGregor/Russell/etc.'s AMAZING ADVENTURES/Killraven 18-39
• Bruce Jones/Brent Anderson/Ron Frenz KA-ZAR 1-27
• Levitz/Giffen LEGION 285-306
• Stern/Romita Jr AMAZING SPIDERMAN 224-250

And many other series.





While I've re-read the Moore and Miller stuff many times, I've re-read these latter books and other series far more often.
They're a heck of a lot more fun.

I'm impressed by the brilliance of Moore's and Miller's prose, and find that exciting as well.

But the humor, warmth and heroism of the latter series I listed are what I more often prefer.

I'd agree that the ones, as you say, Mxy, "who followed Moore and Miller" imitated the dark surface elements without replicating the enduring quality and complexity of Moore and Miller's 80's works.
Which is why these 80's works are still regarded as the high-water mark of comics storytelling, and the works that have followed are regarded as pretentious, derivative, and inferior by comparison.



--------------------


"This Man, This Wonder Boy..."

I think the biggest point is that silver age comics were written more specifically for children, modern comics are written more specifically for adults!

Silver age and Golden age comics are great on a pure nostalgia basis, but certainly were not better written or drawn than modern comics.

How many Superman stories in the silver age revolved around some stupid plot where Supes or one of his cast, were mutated into some ridiculous thing or another, and the same story would essentially be repeated issue after issue, with slight variations!

The Dark Knight and Watchmen really kickstarted an era of storytelling that actually appealed to adults rather than appealing to the child inside of them.
(although I would say that stories like Crisis on infinite earths, had a lot to do with it as well)

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.

A question from the audience asked him about one of the more recent storylines in GREEN LANTERN continuity, I believe it was about the whole parralax thing.
Fox began answering saying: "First of all, I'd never write a story like that..."
At which point he was interrupted by wild applause and cheering from the nerds who cant let go of their childhood, and move on.

PREACHER or whatever excrement they like from Garth Ennis and Grant Morrison or whoever (that is recognized as doody by anyone outside of comics)

He is just arguing to prove that he is right, and nobody else is right because they dont write long winded posts with stupid pictures and youtube links

You're such a rude,

antagonistic

sack of excrement, Mxy.

You've again created a strawman argument against me,

alleging me to take a position I never actually took, alleging I held up Moore's and Miller's 80's work as the ultimate beat-all storytelling.

Well, he likes Watchmen

And then challenging me to defend a position that is

When in truth I've repeatedly voiced reservations about these stories, precisely because of the over-the-top cynical elements you allege me to praise.

The stories of Moore and Miller are multi-layered, and have bright moments, and redeem themselves beyond their darkness by having something meaningful to say

All that said, if I were to recommend to someone some of the best written and illustrated comic series of the last 40 years, I would name at the top of the list Moore's SWAMP THING, MIRACLEMAN, V FOR VENDETTA, WATCHMEN, and SUPERMAN: WHAT EVER HAPPENED TO THE MAN OF TOMORROW.

So once again, I made my argument clearly, and the only way you could launch your little mockfest was to misrepresent me.

This has unneccessarily been dragged through multiple topic pages, and actually similar personal attacks on me across multiple topics over several years, where I voice distaste for some comic books that you like, and you have a little hissy-fit and call me all sorts of names.

Because I don't share your questionable taste in comic books.

The mere reprinting of it, and the volume of which it sells, which justifies reprinting more and more Golden Age/Silver/Bronze material in hardcover and other editions, speaks of its acclaim, despite what you say about "only the most shocking GL/GA stuff ever got any attention".
Neal Adams DEADMAN and BATMAN/DETECTIVE
Kirby's Fourth World/NEW GODS material
KAMANDI
KILLRAVEN
This stuff has been acclaimed for years, and is back in print.

who have to obsessively prove that PREACHER or whatever excrement they like from Garth Ennis and Grant Morrison or whoever (that is recognized as doody by anyone outside of comics)

is somehow superior to comics of past eras.

Do you guys have small penises, that you need to try this hard to justify what you read?

I'm surprised WB finally came out and asked about you guy's penises, I thought he was going to beat around the bush forever.

I'm just a bit surprised ay just you decisively he makes his points

Is that an insult? And what are you supposed to be, by the way? Nice? It isn't very nice to call people sacks of excrement, Wonder Boy. It isn't very nice at all.



I'm not antagonistic, you are.



If I was a sack of excrement, how could I be sitting here typing this? By not being one, you moron! Note that I called you something you actually are, as opposed to naming you a bag full of manure, which would be simply ridiculous and absurd, the product of a deranged mind.



"Curse you, Fantastic Four! You've again created a strawman argument against me!"



Excuse me, at what point did I say that you hold Moore and Miller's 80's work as the ultimate beat-all storytelling? (...when did I even mention Miller...?) Could you quote the post where I said that, please? You can't? Why not? Is it because IT DOESN'T EXIST? Yeah. Probably. You can't quote stuff that doesn't exist, Dave. That's fucking silly.

I said that you LIKED that stuff, Dave. Reading isn't so hard, it's just a matter of applying yourself to it. Go back and read me post (more carefully this time, concentrate in getting every word), go back and read it, then weep. No, let me make it easier for ya:



Ok. Now weep.



You're just too damn cute.



"over-the-top cynical elements you allege me to praise". When did I say you praised those elements, Dave? All I did was mention that they were present in stories that you like. All you've ever done to argue that Preacher is shit is mention moments contained within that comic. When I mention that equally questionable moments are present in comics you DO like, you flip. You start weeping uncontrollably. That anger you're feeling is your brain telling you that you're wrong, Dave. Learn to listen to your brain. It's your friend.



I don't know HOW I got the impression that you like them!



Miracleman, otherwise known as the comic in which a teen sidekick is raped by other teens (who he then kills in a violent and graphic manner). It's more than that, of course, but who the fuck cares. As long as there's something questionable depicted within the comic, it's depraved and it's crap.

I assure you, Wonder Boy, that if this comic came out today you would fucking hate it.



Dave, in all seriousness, everyone here knows that the more faithfully we describe you in our posts, the more insulting they come out. If I've ever misrepresented you it's been in your best interest.



No no no, this is how it goes:
1. You claim something is crap (generally using the word "depraved")
2. I argue that it's not using actual arguments
3. You place your counter-arguments in the form of weeping
4. I point and laugh

THEN I call you names.



Hate to be the one to tell you this, Dave, but the people who DO share your impeccable taste in comics are literally dying out.

You may take solace in the fact that when I'm old, as you are, kids will probably find my tastes as outdated as I find yours. I hope to be able to take being phased out into irrelevance with more dignity than you, unless of course I suffer severe brain damage, in which case I'll begin calling everything and everyone depraved for disagreeing with me.

On a more serious note, Dave, I do share some of your tastes: I love Lee/Kirby Fantastic Four comics, among other things. I think they're silly and over the top, but I'm able to look past that and enjoy them. I feel sad that you're completely incapable of doing the same thing and enjoy current comics. You're missing out on a lot of great stuff. If only you weren't such a fucking idiot.

Well, opinions vary on that.

I think the work of Moore, Morrison, Gaiman and Miller, even from the 80's, are pretty dark.





The stories of Moore and Miller are multi-layered, and have bright moments, and redeem themselves beyond their darkness by having something meaningful to say, but are still unmistakeably dark.

Rorschach in the WATCHMEN "The Abyss Gazes Also" chapter... I don't think there's a bright way to interpret that.
Alan Moore in a COMICS JOURNAL interview (issue 138) said it depressed him deeply to crawl inside the mind of Rorschach to fully flesh out the character in this chapter.




And as I said on the previous page, Moore said in a COMIC BOOK ARTIST interview that himself and others had unwittingly brought about a Dark Age in comics with their 1980's work, and that he was attempting to bring back an optimism and upbeat heroism that had been lost, when he created new titles like TOM STRONG and other ABC titles.

[ COMIC BOOK ARTIST # 9, August 2000, in an issue on Charleton characters and creators, pages 108-109.
http://twomorrows.com/comicbookartist/articles/09moore.html

• CBA: But you were able to purge yourself pretty quick, right? You didn't write that many, maybe four or five Superman stories?
  Alan: 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...

]



Miller's work, from RONIN forward, is deeply cynical, and arguably paranoid in its portrayal of government. DARK KNIGHT RETURNS, DARK KNIGHT STRIKES BACK, GIVE ME LIBERTY, SIN CITY, ELECKTRA:ASSASSIN and HARD BOILED being prime examples.





I could find a few stories in Gaiman's SANDMAN that are upbeat (issue 50 in particular) but mostly I just found it very somber and morose. I read the first four trades and scattered issues after, and fail to see what people rave about. It's not horrible, but it's far from the best I've seen in comics.




I personally despise Morrison's works, although there are a few Morrison stories I somewhat like conceptually, although I find his work likewise pretentious, and (Gaiman-like ) full of quickie references to literature characters without really fleshing them out in his stories beyond the slightest cameo-reference, so I constantly envision Morrison musing to himself (and Gaiman as well) : Ah, look how clever I am to know this !
I'm not impressed.





All that said, if I were to recommend to someone some of the best written and illustrated comic series of the last 40 years, I would name at the top of the list Moore's SWAMP THING, MIRACLEMAN, V FOR VENDETTA, WATCHMEN, and SUPERMAN: WHAT EVER HAPPENED TO THE MAN OF TOMORROW.

And also Miller's DAREDEVIL, BATMAN: THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS, and BATMAN: YEAR ONE.

Nothing by Morrison or Gaiman, despite some decent stories, would make my list though.

But because these above series are dark works, I have a much greater fondness for:

• Wein/Wrightson SWAMP THING 1-10 (DARK GENESIS trade)
• Joe Kubert's TARZAN 207-235
• Goodwin/Simonson MANHUNTER
• Jack Kirby's FOREVER PEOPLE, NEW GODS, MISTER MIRACLE, JIMMY OLSEN, KAMANDI, and O.M.A.C.
• O'Neil/Adams DETECTIVE (just out in hardcover) and BATMAN
• O'Neil/Kaluta THE SHADOW
• Englehart/Perez and Shooter/Perez AVENGERS 141-178, and Michelinie/Byrne AVENGERS 181-191
• Englehart/Rogers Batman in DETECTIVE 471-476 (reprinted in the BATMAN:STRANGE APPARITIONS trade)
• Michelinie/Romita Jr/Layton IRON MAN 115-156
• McGregor/Russell/etc.'s AMAZING ADVENTURES/Killraven 18-39
• Bruce Jones/Brent Anderson/Ron Frenz KA-ZAR 1-27
• Levitz/Giffen LEGION 285-306
• Stern/Romita Jr AMAZING SPIDERMAN 224-250

And many other series.





While I've re-read the Moore and Miller stuff many times, I've re-read these latter books and other series far more often.
They're a heck of a lot more fun.

I'm impressed by the brilliance of Moore's and Miller's prose, and find that exciting as well.

But the humor, warmth and heroism of the latter series I listed are what I more often prefer.

I'd agree that the ones, as you say, Mxy, "who followed Moore and Miller" imitated the dark surface elements without replicating the enduring quality and complexity of Moore and Miller's 80's works.
Which is why these 80's works are still regarded as the high-water mark of comics storytelling, and the works that have followed are regarded as pretentious, derivative, and inferior by comparison.



--------------------


"This Man, This Wonder Boy..."

Now the fact that the golden and silver age stuff is years old, and a lot of it is either destroyed or costs the earth, is a possible reason for the reprints, so to say thats why they are better than modern comics (which dont cost as much, and are available in great numbers due to not being old) is yet another comedic line.

Of course there is a market for the old stuff, whether it be people like Grouchyoldman, who cant move on, or it be people just reading for nostalgia, or collectability, there will always be a market for it.

Now in say 30 or so years time, when Preacher is still being reprinted, over and over again, does that mean we can turn round to Grouchy, and say "See, it must be superior to everything, as its being reprinted!"?

BTW, are you trying to say that comic book creators from days of yore, were recognised as great writers and scholars?

If you are, then you are truly deluded.

Go back to your 70's gloryhole, and you would find that people outside of comics felt that anything to do with comics was shit and gay and nerdy as fuck.
At least modern day comic fans get a lot less shit, because the media is no longer as frowned upon since the huge successes at the cinema and on tv, with projects straight out of "modern" comic books.

Despite your ascertions, the Batman movies that have been the most successful, have been those that follow the darker grittier Batman (the two Burton films and the 2 Nolan films), where as those that returned to the high camp you worship, stunk.

The likes of 300, Sin City and even stuff like X-Men, avoid that lighter stuff, and prove that people want dark.

The likes of Ennis and Morrison, are people that movie studios want to adapt.
Nobody wants to adapt Gardner Fox's take on the JLA cause its aimed at kids, and has absolutely no relevance to a modern audience.

You selectively quoted me, to strawman me yet again.

If you haddn't quoted me out of context, with selective omission, you never could have made the argument.
Here's what I quoted on page 2, from over 5 years ago:



So once again, while I acknowledge the Moore and Miller mid-1980s material as some of the best written material, then and now, I clearly label it as dark work that I enjoy with reservations, and SPECIFICALLY LIST what are the gold-standard works that I love and re-read and go back to far more often than the Moore and Miller material.

Excuse me, at what point did I say that you hold Moore and Miller's 80's work as the ultimate beat-all storytelling?

I said that you LIKED that stuff, Dave.

"over-the-top cynical elements you allege me to praise". When did I say you praised those elements, Dave? All I did was mention that they were present in stories that you like.

Once again Moore and Miller THEMSELVES acknowledge that their work was dark, and that their work plunged the industry into a Dark Age. As the interview I quoted earlier makes clear.

As well as many other highly regarded comics creators who see the ongoing Dark Age as a decline in the industry, as expressed in interviews with Alex Toth, Paul Smith, Joe Kubert, Keith Giffen, and on and on.