The Train Pulls Out and I Am Not Aboard

[Harvey Jerkwater]

Are there comics that everyone loves but you?

Or, considering how contentious a lot comic fans are, a comic or graphic novel that is widely considered great, seminal, or beloved, but doesn't do a dang thing for you?

Moreover, what about said books left you uninterested?

For example, I never understood the appeal of The Authority. Rather than sophisticated, equipped with newfangled insights, or exciting, I found it a standard superhero actioner with no extra brain, double the carnage, and triple the smug. Many adore it. I am not one of them. Life goes on.

So...howzabout it?

[Greg Hatcher]

Transmetropolitan I just don't get. I hate to make it two Warren Ellis titles in a row, but really I just don't like that book and I don't get why anyone else does. The way people carry on about it it's like they've never seen an asshole before.

On the other hand, I like the original Ellis Authority and Stormwatch runs okay and Global Frequency is one of my favorite books ever. Go figure.

Just so it's not all Ellis in the thread, I really don't see what all the shouting was about with Promethea. And Fables strikes me as a 'meh' book, sort of Sandman lite. But I'm reasonably sure that's just me; I can appreciate the craft that went into those books but they're simply not anything I am interested in reading.

[atoningunifex]

My big two "Why the hell does everyone love this basically minor stuff" comics of the last few years:

We3. Don't get the great love for it at all. After reading it I said to my pet rabbit "I love you, but I really didn't love this comic. Plus, I think you would speak in complete sentences if some evil scientists turned you into a weapon."

Blankets. Basically the comic book equivalent of an Oprah book. Somoene in a rural setting dealing with childhood misery and a conflict of faith. Plus,. another book by a heterosexual about how hard it is to be a heterosexual. Yawn. The art was okay, tho.

[Gingold]

I'll second Fables. It's always seemed a lot more clever than good.

As for the Ellis stuff, I loved Authority, liked Transmet just fine, but couldn't get into Global Frequency for the life of me. It seemed very formulaic and lacking some sort of overall storyline (which I think was the intention, but it didn't grab me at all.)

[Cei-U!]

All-Star Superman. Its glacial pace, poor storytelling and revival of the worst aspects of the Silver Age take on the characters leave me ice cold. The art is pretty and Morrison's books are always full of cool ideas but, man, what a snore.

Cei-U!
I just don't get it!

[Dash-Dot]

New Avengers. I don't get what the hell people see in this boring comic book, which is practically devoid of character development, which has the tendency to go several issues at a time without anything of consequence actually occuring, which manages to take plot points that, in other comics, would normally take between one and six pages, and stretch them out to an issue or more, that sets up storylines or key dramatic moments and then throws them away in an anti-climax, and is filled with more plotholes than Alien Vs. Predator.

Just... Don't... Get it. Sigh...

[JLarson]

She-Hulk - the bottom line here is that despite being praised as the second coming of christ via a comedy comic book, it simply not as funny, creative, original, compelling, or deep as the really good comedy books out there. When people cry, "save this really funny book," all I hear (having bought the first two trades) is, "I demand comics remind me of my youth in the 80's." Very silly book to me. I actually have the same problem with Slott's Thing series, which is unfortunate, since I thought his Arkham Asylum story was really interesting.

Infinite Crisis - Yeah, I'm just not real keen on spending money on and reading what is essentially a 30$ deus ex machina to make people buy more of their crap. That's supposed to be a compelling story? Really? I'm even a huge fan of Jimenez, but he couldn't save this title for me - even if he had illustrated all of it. Just a really boring exercise.

I thought that all of those supposedly fantastic Claremont X-stories from the past 30 years were really very awful to read as well. Not once as I struggled through his molassasy writing did I at any point find myself more driven by the story than I was irritated by the dialogue & silly "surprises."

[Dan Apodaca]

Sin City bores the fuck out of me. The dialogue is corny, and the characters are all ancient types. I like Noir and all, but this is camp.

And I hate camp.

[Elegance Liberty]

Invincible. Then again, I've never liked any of Robert Kirkman's stuff (this one forum I go to hypes him up to be the Second Coming of Christ/Buddah/Whatever Diety you happen to worship) so that may be a factor.

Any of Claremont's stuff. I LOVE the Phoenix Saga and all, but the guy is just so... wordy. He's got people thinking the most obvious things and it's just so irritating.

Any of DC's stuff. Don't get me wrong, I LOVE the DCAU (Animated Universe). But perhaps it's me growing up with the animated adaptations of Batman, Superman and even Teen Titans that has kinda alienated me from ever liking the comics. And maybe this was the reason why I was so repulsed by Justice Leauge Unlimited: how in the heck am I supposed to like and care about characters I know next to nothing about? (Save for Green Arrow and Black Canary... I kinda have a vague idea of who they are)

[BillR]

I can't call myself a fan of Y the Last Man, Fables, Preacher, or anything written by Geoff Johns.

[JLarson]

I can't call myself a fan of Y the Last Man, Fables, Preacher, or anything written by Geoff Johns.

I'm right there with you on the Geoff Johns thing - but the others... any explanation?

[scratchie]

You're all on crack. Fables is one of the best comic books I've ever read. It's practically the only book being published right now that seems to be populated by real people rather than interchangeable catchphrase dispensers. And the actual plotting is usually brilliant.

[Gingold]

You're all on crack. Fables is one of the best comic books I've ever read. It's practically the only book being published right now that seems to be populated by real people rather than interchangeable catchphrase dispensers. And the actual plotting is usually brilliant.

I read the first two trades and it just wasn't working for me. It wasn't particularly bad or anything, but it hardly seemed to deserve all the praise it was getting. Does it get better? I'd hate to think I was missing out on something good.

[The Humanist Hero]

Promethea is one of the most boring comics I've ever read. I stopped after the first two volumes because I couldn't take it anymore. And I love Alan Moore's work, including the rest of the ABC titles.

[OzBat!]

The new Green Lantern series. I got the first ten issues, and it just never did anything for me. I hung on desperately hoping for something to enthuse me and I got bumpkis.

At least GLCorps was fun!

[JLarson]

Promethea is one of the most boring comics I've ever read. I stopped after the first two volumes because I couldn't take it anymore. And I love Alan Moore's work, including the rest of the ABC titles.

That's insane. By the end of Promethea, I had read many, many things never even attempted in a comic book before.

[BillR]

I'm right there with you on the Geoff Johns thing - but the others... any explanation?

I find most of Vaughan's work to be unexciting, and at times hopelessly bland. Fables is sort of the same way... I like the concept, but the execution loses me.

As for Preacher, well, I dig Ennis but I can't get into what's supposedly his magnum opus. I don't *think* it's because of his treatment of religion or of the vulgarities, but I'm not quite sure what it is...

[Strannik]

Are there comics that everyone loves but you?

Or, considering how contentious a lot comic fans are, a comic or graphic novel that is widely considered great, seminal, or beloved, but doesn't do a dang thing for you?

Moreover, what about said books left you uninterested?

For example, I never understood the appeal of The Authority. Rather than sophisticated, equipped with newfangled insights, or exciting, I found it a standard superhero actioner with no extra brain, double the carnage, and triple the smug. Many adore it. I am not one of them. Life goes on.

So...howzabout it?

I am probably going to get flamed for this, but I don't understand all the hype about Spider-Girl series. It's a perfectly good series, but nothing too terribly extrodinary.

I don't get what's the big deal about Jack Kirby's art. I mean, when it comes to weapons, spaceships and other science-fiction stuff, I can understand, but when it comes to drawing more mundane objects and characters, he doesn't strike me as particularly extrodinary.

I like New Avengers. It has engaging plot, interesting characters and great dialogue. The pacing does drag a bit, but it's not nearly a bad as people make it out to be.

That is all.

[drpblunt]

ok, not exactly a comic book but...

the FF movie, horrible editing, horrible acting, horrible casting, (sure alba looks good but she aint no sue storm, and she couldnt act to save her life)

the only thing that was good about that movie was thing and torch, but that doesnt make it worth the 10 euro admission (or 10 bucks for that matter)

jeez what a heaping pile.

plus, why does Brian michael bendis get any work, the man is a hack, a hack! i say!

and on to the comics..
IC = infinite crap: an orgy of crappy retcons and pointless gore and for what?
Idnt Crisis: dont get me started on this wank fest, crappy read, but good for emergency TP
52: i gimmick to ensure that the masses will buy 52 issues of worthless garbage, what a naked display of greed

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

Anything Chuck Austen.
I know some people really liked it, but I so don't get his work, it seems so bad to me, that I honestly/literally question the intelligence of people who read it.

Most recent Warren Ellis work.
Ever since he went exculsive with DC (a few years back now) I just stopped digging his work.
I've been following him around for a decade (ever since Ghost Rider Annual #2), but recently, as he's started selling more and being hailed as a god, he's just stopped doing it for me. I don't mind Global Frequency, and some of the three issue mini's he did for DC were alright, but the rest has had me scratching my head.
(Apparat and Scars are the only exceptions I can think of. Maybe Switchblade Honey - though I think it was pre-exclusive).


We3. Don't get the great love for it at all. After reading it I said to my pet rabbit "I love you, but I really didn't love this comic. Plus, I think you would speak in complete sentences if some evil scientists turned you into a weapon."


I'll second that.
Why do people keep posting about it?
Why should we reccomend it to our friends?
Why the hell do people admit to crying while reading this book???

I just don't get it. It was ok, but I was a bit annoyed it was a trade and not a one-shot or somthing. Seemed overly long, had no point, and I'd seen everything in it before.

It's especially annoying as it gets so much attention, and yet Sea Guy and Vimarama, which came out around the same time (and were some of the best Morrison I've read in a while) get no attention, or hatred aimed there way.

[dancj]

You're all on crack. Fables is one of the best comic books I've ever read.

Damn right!!

For me:
Y: The Last Man - It's good, but not THAT good
Authority under Waren Ellis - It was okay, but a pale shadow of Stormwatch
The Losers
The Batman/Dracula trilogy (and anything else by Doug Moench)
Black Panther (and anything else by Christopher Priest)
Chris Claremont's X-Men - including The Dark Phoenix Saga and God Loves Man Kills
Eddie Cambell's Alec - one of the few books I couldn't bring myself to finish
Goodbye Chunky Rice - Rubbish, though I really enjoyed Blankets
Frank Miller's 300 - This didn't really grab me as much as most of his other stuff
Channel Zero
Suicide Squad (and anything else by John Ostrander)

[scratchie]

I don't get what's the big deal about Jack Kirby's art. I mean, when it comes to weapons, spaceships and other science-fiction stuff, I can understand, but when it comes to drawing more mundane objects and characters, he doesn't strike me as particularly extrodinary.Well, a lot of Jack Kirby's reputation comes from being there first and doing all the things we take for granted in comic books before anyone else had. Just compare a Kirby issue of Fantastic Four to a Mike Sekowsky issue of Justice League of America and I think you'll see that the JLA art looks hopelessly dated, while Kirby's art, even if it's a little rough around the edges, looks a lot more modern.

In terms of his actual art, the primary attraction for me is the "science fiction stuff" and his panoramic landscapes. Nobody draws technological gizmos or giant monsters like the King (or, if they do, it's obvious that they're copying his style).

[scratchie]

I read the first two trades and it just wasn't working for me. It wasn't particularly bad or anything, but it hardly seemed to deserve all the praise it was getting. Does it get better? I'd hate to think I was missing out on something good.Well, I may be the wrong person to ask, since I love every volume of Fables.

But one characteristic of the book is that each story arc has its own distinctive feel. E.g., volume 1 is a mystery while volume 2 is political satire. The first issues I actually read are now in the "Homelands" trade, and they totally blew me away, so that might be a good place to start if you want to give it another shot.

As I said before, one thing I love about Fables is that the characters actually have identifiable, consistent personalities. It's not just "The cranky guy", "The geeky guy", "The hot chick", etc. When Prince Charming comes close to seducing Beauty in one story, we see two complex people with identifiable motivations. Most comic books are lucky if their characters reach the level of versimilitude of a TV sitcom.

The other thing, and I guess would make the series tend to get better as it goes along, is that things that happen in one story have resonances in later stories. Not just the comic book cliches of "Oh my gosh, my mortal enemy is really my girlfriend's step-father!", but we see how the characters react to, and are changed by, the events in their lives. Again, like real people rather than cardboard cutouts.

[Hombre]

I had my suitcase packed and ready to go for Brubaker's Captain America.

I really felt it had that something at the beginning. That has changed completely after a few issues and at the moment I don't like him any more than Bendis, Hudlin or Millar.

It may be that I don't get it. There's a couple of psychopaths on a killing spree in the American heartland, one of which Captain America failed to apprehend, both of whom probably former enemies - don't know for sure about Sin - thus, in a way, his responsibility, and all he thinks about is Bucky? He's completely nonchalant about it.

It just feels hollow, for some reason, all of it.

[Scott Wegener]

Blankets. Basically the comic book equivalent of an Oprah book. Somoene in a rural setting dealing with childhood misery and a conflict of faith. Plus,. another book by a heterosexual about how hard it is to be a heterosexual. Yawn. The art was okay, tho.


I read an interview with the BLANKETS guy. He came off as very anti-comic books and like his work was somehow above it all. I've thumbed through it at the store and the art is medeocre at best. I can't even comment on the story since I couldn't make myself care enough to read it.

I'm also not a big fan of V for Vendeta. I can't get into the art or the prose. I know that according to the spin its got an important message, but it just comes off as preachy to me. Like there is no secret truth to be revealed -its not saying anything that I haven't already thought of on my own.

WANTED was like that too -but I enjoy it just because its a fun story.

[Jamescush]

Mark Millar's The Authority.
Did he ever read Ellis's Stormwatch and Authority runs? All of the character's personalities changed and they just became 'let's all have sex with each other and then kill people' types.

[BillR]

ok, not exactly a comic book but...

the FF movie, horrible editing, horrible acting, horrible casting, (sure alba looks good but she aint no sue storm, and she couldnt act to save her life)

It's okay. All sane people hated the FF movie.

[BillR]

Oh, right, another one for me: Sleeper. Actually, most of Brubaker's stuff feels empty to me. Hmm.

[Jake V]

We3. Don't get the great love for it at all. After reading it I said to my pet rabbit "I love you, but I really didn't love this comic. Plus, I think you would speak in complete sentences if some evil scientists turned you into a weapon."
You are truly dead inside.

[atoningunifex]

Oh, you know what else annoys me about We3? The fans of We3 freak out if you say the least little thing against We3. They're like the worst of fandom. I'd imagine that should one say saomething less than glowing about We3 in their actual presence they'd kill you.

They're like Trekkies with pets.

[Sheldon]

Anything by Joss Whedon...I don't get what the fuss is. The dialogue is forced & tries too hard to be cute.

[JLarson]

Anything by Joss Whedon...I don't get what the fuss is. The dialogue is forced & tries too hard to be cute.

Word. I've never found anything he's been involved in as being anything but b-movie silliness.

[jaguarshark]

'100 Bullets'. I picked up the first two trades, and maybe I was just in a bad mood, but as much as I loved the concept and the plotting, Azzarello's renowned dialogue read like a bad episode of 'The Shield'. Dammit, now this thread's made me want to go read them again to be sure...

[Jake V]

Oh, you know what else annoys me about We3? The fans of We3 freak out if you say the least little thing against We3. They're like the worst of fandom. I'd imagine that should one say saomething less than glowing about We3 in their actual presence they'd kill you.

They're like Trekkies with pets.
What's the point? You're half dead already.

[Michael P]

I dunno, maybe I just lack the Scott Pilgrim gene, but I read the Free Comic Book Day book, and it's good, but it's not the most awesome thing ever. I could read pretty much any first-generation webcomic and get the exact same thing.

[BillR]

Word. I've never found anything he's been involved in as being anything but b-movie silliness.

1. What's wrong with B-movie silliness? That describes most of my favorite movies, easily.

2. You're dead to me. But that's mainly because Joss Whedon is one of my major inspirations and made me want to become a filmmaker.

Cheers.

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

2. You're dead to me. But that's mainly because Joss Whedon is one of my major inspirations and made me want to become a filmmaker.

Cheers.

That Buffy film had an effect on lots of us.

[Stony]

Lucifer.

I tried this thing. I really did. Got the mini and the first 12 issues, but it still didn't do it for me.

I think what I really missed about this was that this wasn't Him. It wasn't the DEE EE VEE EYE ELL. It was this bloody brooding Romantic tragic wussy Byronic figure who wasn't bad or wasn't good, he just *was*, like the Endless or something.

Man, I just want the Devil! Horns, goattee, pitchfork, tail, the whole she-bang! Just a naughty, evil Devil who delights in getting up to mischief! *That's* a book I can get behind, instead of another bloody Vertigo title that acts as an apologist tract for "tragic, misunderstood figures" who couldn't afford good public relations... Bah humbug!

[palaeomerus]

Well...Transmetropolitan was way too long for me. The diarreah jokes got old as did the brutal but repetitive anti-socialness of it. Also my impression of it was hurt a bit because I had actually heard of Hunter S. Thompson and Lester Bangs and known a few drop out post-punk psuedo-rebellious crap strirring posers from UK by the time I read it. It was completely not a novelty item for and lacked any sense of mystery for me. If I'd read it before college I would have loved it. The Woody Allen style satirical futurism got old too. That stuff is best in small doses. I figure it should have been about four volumes long and most of it should have been chucked as obvious padding. As a series I think it cries out for serious editing and abridgement.

I also did not particularly grok Promethea. I can see whay it was popular though. It is very conciously designed to be a heck of a jerk off if you are into gnostic or golden dawn type occultism or happen to be unusually devoted to Jungian symbolism and spend all your free time decyphering your reactions to strings of nonsequitors hoping to peer into the mysterious realm of the unconcious mind.

After reading Promethea a lot of frustrated magicianoids, would be mind stretchers, post millenial shut ins, and " hidden potential realizers" no doubt got back into the spoon bending, mirror gazing, penny-staring-until-you-think-you-saw-it-moving, meditating, lucid dreaming, and "vision" having business.

After Promethea it seems so obvious that with just a few more rituals from the third part of that tattered perfect bound spellbook (borrowed from the lady at the organic vegetable market) or a few weeks of purer diet that THIS TIME everything would be different! It makes the would be mystic sure that they are only a smidgeon away from REALLY be able to mind control their boss into giving them a raise, their ex into coming back to them, and then just for spite they'd use their newly expanded intuition to tear down all those barriers that those black lodge scientist loser types put up to keep them from knowing all the secrets of the real universe. And THEN theyd know the truth!

I'm not a believer in that stuff though and Promethea quit being a commentary on the weird history of Wonder Woman's more famous "creators" I kind of tuned out and got annoyed with the "baby's first grimoire" aspect of it. It really should have come with a copy of Dark Side of the Moon bundled in. And a little jar of home made peace jelly.

[BillR]

That Buffy film had an effect on lots of us.

Oh, the movie sucked, but that's not Joss's fault.

[Evan Waters]

Chris Ware. I got the ACME LIBRARY OF NOVELTY collection for Christmas, and, well-

Page 1: Loneliness, alienation.
Page 2: Loneliness, alienation.
Page 3: Loneliness, alienation.

And so on through the whole thing. Maybe the cartoons read okay on their own, but compiled they're just a tad repetitive. Of course, that style and attitude's not my thing to start with, so I'm biased.

[DubipR]

Anything by Joss Whedon...I don't get what the fuss is. The dialogue is forced & tries too hard to be cute.

In total agreement with this one. Better TV writer than comic writer. His style of humor and writing doesn't transfer that well to comics. You need the full delivery of look and the reaction of a Whedon-esque punchline.

Also books I don't get:
Walking Dead- snorefest
Young Avengers- its good, but not that great

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

Youngblood.

That motherfucker sold millions, but I always thought the art looked crap and the story made no sense.

[LtMarvel]

X-Men...never got it.

Goon...don't see any humor in it.

[Jolly Mon]

I may be alone in this, but I will nominate Watchmen. Ok, so the good guy is willing to kill millions for his version of Utopia, a lot of people sleep around, and any excuse to show a naked guy's business is good enough. I thought the attempt to "deconstruct" comics in general was overblown, and the story itself was just dull. I never got to really care about any of the characters, so what ever happened to them didn't matter. But that's just my opinion.

[Graham Vingoe]

Never managed to "get" Bone - managed to read the 1st 3 trades but it just never clicked apart from a couple of laugh out loud funny lines here and there

[Starkicker]

I'm on the Pro-Bendis side of the road, I loved his Daredevil and I liked House of M and New Avengers, but I don't get Ultimate Spider-Man.
The day Ult. Spidey #1 came out I flipped through it, and put it back (ok, maybe I should of bought it), when I read the free version I didn't get it, boring.

Any Ultimate title I've tried (X-men, Team Up, Daredevil) I haven't liked.

[Citizen V]

Are there comics that everyone loves but you?

Many adore it. I am not one of them. Life goes on.

So...howzabout it?

I like the title of the thread.Well,recently nearly every comic i read doesnt interest me much anymore.For some cases,its episising more on suprise and shock,more than a good story.

I havent liked how Marvel has been treating its characters,and its continunity.When i sometimes talk about things,people say my information is outdated.I say thats a good thing,im not about to update my sources for bad reading.

Why is it that people still talk about this slop like its the best thing in the world?

[Ogre U AHole]

I flipped through a couple of Brubaker's Captain America's and *nope* just not interested. But I can at least stomach Bendis' horribly forced "cute" dialogue and wasted splash pages/big panels of buildings, cities, and planets to see Cap in a team environment.

I'd like to defend Slott's She-Hulk and Thing but the criticisms' leveled were pretty valid. It's not really a right or wrong issue; do you enjoy innocent fun comics or gritty realism in comics? Neither answer is "wrong" but I'll go for innocent fun every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

[dancj]

I'm on the Pro-Bendis side of the road, I loved his Daredevil and I liked House of M and New Avengers, but I don't get Ultimate Spider-Man.

Ultimate Spider-Man isn't a patch on Bendis's other stuff (for my tastes). I do buy the TPBs (cheap on eBay) and some are quite good, but others (like Ultimate Six) are so padded it's silly. Really nothing happens in that story and it's one of the longer ones

Dan

[sschroeder]

Sin City.

The extreme violence, ugliness and subject matter are not really my cup of tea.

[scratchie]

Sin City.

The extreme violence, ugliness and subject matter are not really my cup of tea.I'm with you there -- you've read one ultra-violent adolescent revenge fantasy, you've read them all -- but I wasn't aware that this was considered one of the comics that "everyone" likes. Plus the art is extremely ugly. I started paging through one of these books in the store and had to put it down after two or three pages because my eyes hurt.

[Schmakt]

very interesting thread so far...

I hate to turn it back to Ellis, but I didn't like his and Granov's Iron Man run... not really at all. It may have been partly due the lateness, but I wanted the Busiek Iron Man back...

As someone else mentioned... Supergirl... I really liked PAD's Supergirl, but, apart from the joy of seeing fake 14-year-old breasts and miniskirts, I wasn't interested in this series at all.

Someone else also mentioned New Avengers, and I think I have to jump on that too... This last issue (#20) was, in my opinion just terrible.

And I'm not sure if it's really popular or not... and, while I like the story ideas a lot, I have to say Wolverine: Origins. I DESPISE the art. It worked ok in, like, Punisher vs. Bullseye, but EVERYONE has the same damned face and the same damned expression. Dropped this series after giving it a 2-issue chance. That's enough.

[Nitz the Bloody]

All Star Superman. It's a fun read, and I loves me teh Grant Morrison and Frank Quitely, but ASS just reads like repackaged versions of the Silver Age DC stories, which were even then completely inferior to Silver Age Marvel, and hold up even worse today.

Heck, I don't like Superman in general. I know he was the first, but we've evolved way beyond the age when all a superhero had to do was lift cars and save kittens from trees, and the Big Blue Boy Scout seems to be frozen solid.

[BillR]

You know I'm going to have to shoot you for that, Nitzy.

[Adem]

I bought the first volume of Scott Pilgrim just because everyone kept telling me how great it was and I just didn’t care for it. Nothing was wrong with it, but it didn’t convince me in any way to buy another volume. I tried Brubaker’s Captain America three times and never enjoyed it as much as others seem to. The first time was when the series launched, the second when the Winter Soldier arc was in full swing, and the third time was #15.

[dancj]

I bought the first volume of Scott Pilgrim just because everyone kept telling me how great it was and I just didn’t care for it.

I enjoyed Scott Pilgrim. I'm not 100% convinced yet, but I'll certainly try vol 2 (when it turns up cheaply enough on eBay).

Sharknife on the other hand just seemed like a load of rubbish to me

[dancj]

A couple more

The Crow - Pretentious goth wank story with really stiff art
Kabuki vol 1: Circle of Fire - Pretentious goth wank story with really stiff art (though admittedly Mack's art has improved a lot since)

[Elegance Liberty]

I have to ask... does manga count?

'Cause if that's the case, I could list a whole bunch 'o titles: Full Metal Alchemist, Naruto, One Piece, Fruits Basket, Gravitation (aka Queer as Folk... In Space)... you get my point.

The only manga worth reading -strictly IMHO- is stuff like Cyborg 009, Leiji Matsumoto's stuff (Galaxy Express and Captain Harlock)... basically all the classics and not the mainstream stuff today.

[Josh S]

V FOR VENDETTA - Zzzzzzzzz... Also, I hate the art.

HELLBLAZER and TRANSMETROPOLITAN - Read the first trades and didn't like anything about either.

Warren Ellis - I can't think of a single story I've enjoyed, other than PLANETARY (did he write that?).

SIN CITY - The art ruins the book for me. It looks half-assed and rushed. I like the movie, though.

PUNISHER (or similar characters) - I'm just not fond of these kinds of stories. I like spandex and capes.

[Dan Apodaca]

Does anybody else get irritated by people using IMHO when their opinion is anything but humble?

[Dizzy D]

Does anybody else get irritated by people using IMHO when their opinion is anything but humble?

Than just picture the H stands for Honest.

[dancj]

I have to ask... does manga count?
Ooh - Good point....

Lone Wolf and Cub. I only read the first volume, but man was that a slog. It took for ever and I was bored out of my skull


The only manga worth reading -strictly IMHO- is stuff like Cyborg 009, Leiji Matsumoto's stuff (Galaxy Express and Captain Harlock)... basically all the classics and not the mainstream stuff today.

Hmmm.... I haven't heard of any of those classics. I thought the classics were things like Akire, Ghost in the Shell and Lone Wolf and Cub.

For me, the best manga books I've read are Akira (despite the weak endiing), Nausicaa of the Valley of Wind and Blade of the Immortal

[dancj]

V FOR VENDETTA - Zzzzzzzzz... Also, I hate the art.

HELLBLAZER and TRANSMETROPOLITAN - Read the first trades and didn't like anything about either.

You might want to try the Ennis HEllblazer stuff. It's way way better than the Delano stuff for my tastes

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

You might want to try the Ennis HEllblazer stuff. It's way way better than the Delano stuff for my tastes

I'd say try the Ennis stuff, as he seems to hate Ellis stuff, but really, face facts Dan, he's a Spandex guy..

[Dan Apodaca]

Than just picture the H stands for Honest.

Well, in my lying opinion, that's pretty silly.

[Clint Barton]

I may be chastised for saying this...but....I don't get what the big deal is over Watchmen. <running into foxhole>

[dancj]

I may be chastised for saying this...but....I don't get what the big deal is over Watchmen. <running into foxhole>

And so you should be!

You won't be chastised as much as I will when I say the vast majority of Will Eisner stuff I've read has done nothing for me

[TheTen-EyedMan]

A massive amount of Geoff Johns' work leaves me cold.

I just don't get the appeal. He's an okay writer but then so was David V Reed back in the day.

A lot of people I know don't like Gail Simone's work. They are stupid.

Well, everyone's entitled to their opinion but some people's opinions are like their asses.

Another comic is Y: The Last Man. And that's not because of Brian Vaughn writing of the worst Batman story in it's 70 year history.

Back in the 90s, Preacher was my "Da Fug?" comic. I just did not get what the fuss was about.

[JohnPopa]

I second or, uh, third the Geoff Johns thing: dull, lifeless writing that just wiggles plot points (most of which are just fellating some story from 30 years ago that I never read) with no spark or character or really passionate writing. It's just 'what happens' and that's it. I tried the first year or so of his 'Flash,' his run on 'Avengers,' the first few issues of 'Titans' and 'Infinite Crisis' and never once has one moment in his writing reached out and grabbed me.

[stealthwise]

Fables is a great high concept, but the first three volumes were... well, I found them to be bland, without any characters besides Bigby that I actually liked.

Blankets is completely overrated, and masturbatory (literally, in one scene).

I dig some Harvey Pekar stuff, but the majority of it is the definition of mundane. I know that's the point, but that doesn't mean I have to like it.

True Story, Swear to God, has some of the most boring, cliched dialogue and situations I've ever read. Reading that book made me slightly dumber.

Planetary never really grabbed me either.

[Skry]

I know I'm probably going to get shot for saying it but I just can't get into the whole DC comics universe.

Superman bores me to no end. Invincible alien with unnecessary secret identity? No thanks.

Batman is cool sometimes, but since I'm not really familiar with any of the characters or the environment he's in, I can't see myself picking up a new comic and following its line.

Green Lantern is a cool concept, but isn't his weakness the color yellow?

Flash has a gimpy costume.
Everyone seems to have lame child sidekicks and multiple children who also fight crime...

I don't know. Maybe someone could help me get into DC by recommending a series to pick up and hopefully change my ways? I'm into gritty realism, violence is always fun but a good story is better. Currently I read all the Ultimate marvel titles, New Avengers, Incredible Hulk, Spawn, Young Avengers, and when the new Punisher series comes out I'll probably pick that one out too. V for Vendetta (though I didn't read the comics) was quite a treat for me in the movie theatre.

Any suggestions? Am I the only one who just can't get into DC?

[Dan Apodaca]

Flash has a gimpy costume.

Hey now, that's not very polite. I mean, just because his costume happens to need a wheelchair to get around, that's no reason for namecalling.

Seriously, though, that sentence conjures up a really weird image.

[Skry]

I'd probably be more interested in a comic featuring Flash's costume in a wheel chair than the actual Flash character himself.

I picked up the new Supergirl issue today because I liked the cover art but I have to say I was completely confused. There's some crazy evil Superman character and Supergirl does some crazy weird stuff.

I don't know. Still can't understand the whole DC thing. I guess silly would have been a better word for Flash's costume, or maybe dull?

[Dan Apodaca]

I'd probably be more interested in a comic featuring Flash's costume in a wheel chair than the actual Flash character himself.

I picked up the new Supergirl issue today because I liked the cover art but I have to say I was completely confused. There's some crazy evil Superman character and Supergirl does some crazy weird stuff.

I don't know. Still can't understand the whole DC thing. I guess silly would have been a better word for Flash's costume, or maybe dull?

I love it. I think it's the perfect blend of simplistic design and classic iconic flair. It's got touches of old-school superhero and greek legend, without looking just like every other costume.

But that's just my taste.

I think the key to yuor trouble with DC comics is that you're looking at them as "DC comics", rather than what specific comics are published under the company. After all, there's lots of different sections of the DC universe. All-Star Superman is nothing like Teen Titans, which is also pretty different from Checkmate, for example.

I don't think it's a good idea to write off a whole publisher, but, in the end, you're free to read what you like.

[Skry]

Well, I'm willing to give it a try (I bought Supergirl issue 7 today) but I just find it difficult.

Any suggestions on excellent reads that I should look into? (something that's going to be on the shelves and not in the back issues would be prefered though)

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

A massive amount of Geoff Johns' work leaves me cold.

I just don't get the appeal. He's an okay writer but then so was David V Reed back in the day.

A lot of people I know don't like Gail Simone's work. They are stupid.

Then they should post about it here.


Well, everyone's entitled to their opinion but some people's opinions are like their asses.

No, everybodies opinion is like an arsehole - we've all got them.


Another comic is Y: The Last Man. And that's not because of Brian Vaughn writing of the worst Batman story in it's 70 year history.


Good - it'd be pretty silly to dislike Y: The Last Man because of a Batman story.

[BizarroBeachHead]

V FOR VENDETTA - Zzzzzzzzz...
Agreed. It's the only movie I like more than the book.

[Dan Apodaca]

Well, I'm willing to give it a try (I bought Supergirl issue 7 today) but I just find it difficult.

Any suggestions on excellent reads that I should look into? (something that's going to be on the shelves and not in the back issues would be prefered though)

Well, All-Star Superman is only on the fourth issue, and I happen to think it's the best book being put out by the big two right now. It's full of heart, comedy, and action, and you don't need to have any knowledge about DC or Superman history, beyond the standard pop-culture awareness. It's my first Superman book ever, and I'm right there with it.

Check it out.

[TheTen-EyedMan]

Well, All-Star Superman is only on the fourth issue, and I happen to think it's the best book being put out by the big two right now. It's full of heart, comedy, and action, and you don't need to have any knowledge about DC or Superman history, beyond the standard pop-culture awareness. It's my first Superman book ever, and I'm right there with it.

Check it out.

The sllllllooooooooowwww pacing is what turned me off....along with the cartoony artwork of Frank Quietly.

I don't like it.

[Dan Apodaca]

The sllllllooooooooowwww pacing is what turned me off....along with the cartoony artwork of Frank Quietly.

I don't like it.

How do you like living on a parallel earth?

[Cei-U!]

How do you like living on a parallel earth?

I must live there too, Dan, because as I noted earlier in the thread, I think the book (the two issues I read, anyway) is numbingly dull. I like Quitely's art, though, even if he doesn't know how to tell a story.

Cei-U!
I summon the four-color Sominex!

[Dan Apodaca]

I must live there too, Dan, because as I noted earlier in the thread, I think the book (the two issues I read, anyway) is numbingly dull. I like Quitely's art, though, even if he doesn't know how to tell a story.

Cei-U!
I summon the four-color Sominex!

Stop invading my planet! ASS is awesome here!

[Sean Whitmore]

You're all nuts. Except for the people I agree with. I mean, you're probably nuts too, but you have good taste in comics.

The Invisibles gets abnormally high praise...not mentioned so much in recent years, but when it is, it's all positive. I can't think of a more INCOMPREHENSIBLE book. I can't even think of it without picturing that parody cover from Wizard: "The end of the world, or just a cat on a bowling ball? You decide!"

She-Hulk and Thing are both good...sometimes quite good...and that's about it. I just don't see Dan Slott as Christ reborn and the answer to all of comicdom's problems. Sometimes I can't even read his books without thinking of Eric Idle: "Nudge-nudge, wink-wink, Spider-Man's new costume is bad. Say no more, say no more, fans complain about continuity too much. Bob's your uncle, I don't like the New Avengers."


SEAN

[Sean Whitmore]

Oh, and Runaways. Goooooddamn, do I hate me some Runaways. Hate the fat useless one. Hate the goth princess. Hate the OC-reject. Hate their retarded "all grownups are evil" worldview. Hate their smugness. Hate Excelsior.

I don't hate Molly or Victor, and that's about the best thing I can say about the main cast.

I really like the villain in the current arc, though. I hope he wins and kills them all.


SEAN

[Reptisaurus!]

The sllllllooooooooowwww pacing is what turned me off....along with the cartoony artwork of Frank Quietly.

I don't like it.

I like Quietly's art a lot. BETTER when he's not drawin' people, (See: We3 or the Sandman story in Endless Nights) but he's still got massive panel composition skills.

And Morrison is far and away my favorite writer in commercial funnybooks.

But All Star Supes... Just ain't my cup of tea. I totally forget # 1, but I reviewed # 2 on the old blog an' just thought that Morrison writing relationship drama was *completely* playing against his strengths as a writer.

Just not my cuppa.

[TheTen-EyedMan]

Stop invading my planet! ASS is awesome here!

I'm stealing this for my sig.

[pennywisdom]

For example, I never understood the appeal of The Authority. Rather than sophisticated, equipped with newfangled insights, or exciting, I found it a standard superhero actioner with no extra brain, double the carnage, and triple the smug. Many adore it. I am not one of them.
You read it straight. It actually works best as parody.

Anything by Joss Whedon...I don't get what the fuss is. The dialogue is forced & tries too hard to be cute.
I agree. He and Bendis are in the same boat (IMO), in that neither brings anything fresh and exciting to the table and they try to distract you from this fact by using flip dialogue. Also, Whedon had to follow Morrison, who is the most forward-thinking superhero writer. I think anyone would look boring compared to Grant.

I don't like Whedon's work outside comics, either. I just saw Serenity and it was completely over-rated. It reminded me of a Sci-Fi Channel Original movie. I understand it has a strong following, but I just watched it waiting for Crow and Tom Servo to pop up at the bottom of the screen.

I'll second that.
Why do people keep posting about [We3]?
Why should we reccomend it to our friends?
Why the hell do people admit to crying while reading this book???
You monster.

[dancj]

I like Quitely's art, though, even if he doesn't know how to tell a story.

That's the first time I've ever seen quitely's storytelling skill criticised. I've often seen people say that they don't like his faces, while in the same sentence admitting that he has incrediblygood storytelling skills.

Personally I think he's one of the bests artists in the business.

Oh, and Runaways. Goooooddamn, do I hate me some Runaways.
[snip]
I really like the villain in the current arc, though. I hope he wins and kills them all.

Erm... if you hate the book so much why are you still reading it?

[Sean Whitmore]

Erm... if you hate the book so much why are you still reading it?


I work in a comic store. Enough time goes by without customers, you pick stuff off the shelves and read them.


SEAN

[BillR]

I don't like Whedon's work outside comics, either. I just saw Serenity and it was completely over-rated. It reminded me of a Sci-Fi Channel Original movie. I understand it has a strong following, but I just watched it waiting for Crow and Tom Servo to pop up at the bottom of the screen.

You make baby Jebus cry.

I mean, Whedon's comics? Not that good. His TV/film work? Brilliant.

[Dan Apodaca]

You make baby Jebus cry.

I mean, Whedon's comics? Not that good. His TV/film work? Brilliant.

I haven't seen it.

[dancj]

I work in a comic store. Enough time goes by without customers, you pick stuff off the shelves and read them.

I've asked that question and seen it asked so many times, but this is the first time I've seen a decent reply!

[Apathy Boy]

STRANGERS IN PARADISE. I recently bought the first collected edition, and after reading the first issue, I was (not to be melodramatic) too sickened by what I had read to continue with the rest.

I have not encountered two more despicable characters than Katchoo and Francine. Which would be fine if they were villains, but we're apparently expected to like them. Or worse yet, to relate to them. Hm, who am I more like? The psycho and just plain mean one or the psycho and whiny, clingy-bordering-on-stalkerish one? Uh, think I'll pass on answering that one.

Despite this, the series seems to get a lot of praise from folks, especially the early part of the run. Am I missing out? Should I ignore the dry heaves and try reading the rest of the first trade?

[Alan2099]

I've never got that series either.

Mark me down as another bendis hater. I just can't see what's so good about anything he does. His characterization if horribly flawwed, he gets backstories, powers and personalities wrong all the time, and his writer is a snore-fest. The only good book I've read from him was the Ultimate team-up stuff.

[TheTen-EyedMan]

STRANGERS IN PARADISE. I recently bought the first collected edition, and after reading the first issue, I was (not to be melodramatic) too sickened by what I had read to continue with the rest.

I have not encountered two more despicable characters than Katchoo and Francine. Which would be fine if they were villains, but we're apparently expected to like them. Or worse yet, to relate to them. Hm, who am I more like? The psycho and just plain mean one or the psycho and whiny, clingy-bordering-on-stalkerish one? Uh, think I'll pass on answering that one.

Despite this, the series seems to get a lot of praise from folks, especially the early part of the run. Am I missing out? Should I ignore the dry heaves and try reading the rest of the first trade?

I think the main drawcard for Strangers in Paradise is watching the train wreck that is the relationship of Francine and Katchoo. Terry Moore must be writing it to get some serious shit about a disastrous relationship out of his system because he has Francine and Katchoo do everything to fuck themselves and the people around them completely and utterly. It's comic book that makes frighteningly clear example of what not to do to someone you care about. Does that open up another genre of comicbookdom? The comics as relationship how not to do things guides.


This month in Spiderman: If you want to protect your friends and family don't do what I did.

This month in Batman: Don't train a 12 year old boy with anger management issues to be a killing machine.

This month in Jonah Hex: Mama, Don't Let Your Babies Grow Up To Be Cowboys....Jonah Hex will most likely shoot them.

[Dan Apodaca]

Yeah, I've never liked Strangers in Paradise. I was reluctant to try it, and then got a free issue, and found it extremely boring.

[Reptisaurus!]

David B.'s stuff. All of it.

It LOOKS cool, all Chinese wood-cutty. But it always feels like a chore for me to read. It's certainly not BAD, but there's something about his stuff that makes my eyes glaze over. I always groan when I get to his work in Mome.

Then again, I've always had trouble with translated comics material.

[Majinlex]

I hated Morrison's New X-men and Gaiman's Sandman so much that I will never read anything written by either of them again. I hate to completely blackball writers like that but they were the worst things I'd read.
Other than that I'd usually give writers a second chance. I think Way is on his 3rd or 4th chance :p

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

Runaways.

When I decided to boycott Marvel for being homophobic this was the one that niggled at me - the 18 issue HC was just around the corner and I had to miss out.
A few weeks ago a sale was on and I decided to break and buy it, and damn was I let down.
It goes for 18 issues and there were 3 storylines in it???'
3 padded to all hell, every second dragged out for ten panel storylines???
They meet a kid, he turns out to be a vampire, and dies when he drinks the aliens blood, and it goes for five issues???

What a load of crap!

Vaughn says in the notes at the back that he wanted to make a comic like the one's he liked as a kid... prblem is Mr. Vaughn, comics back then weren't one or two issue ideas dragged out to six, they were done in one's or twos.

Honestly, I can't remember another time where the failure to actually use the medium one is writing in got in the way of my enjoyment so much.

People keep complaining that it doesn't get the attention it deserves, and now I know why.
It doesn't deserve attention!
It's boring.
Nothing happens for issues at a time.
Why would you be shocked that a series that doesn't deliever any kind of bang for it's buck to get continued/brought?

For the same price these 18 issues cost me I'd brought the Invincible vol1 HC and with six less issues it gave 800 times the story.
Heck, the second voulme that was a bit padded and didn't have the strong arc of the first was still 800 times better, if only because somthing happened on every page.

More writers need to try and be a bit more like Brian Wood with DMZ, and try to at LEAST hit one plot point per page.

Seriously, if CBR was a school playground and it was recess time, if you came to me crying because not enough people think Runaways is good, let alone great, I'd kick you in the shins and give you a wedgie.

[howyadoin]

Everything that's been said about Strangers in Paradise doesn't come close to describing what a useless piece of crap it is. Not even close.




Y'know what it reminds me of? MuchMusic here in Canada has this feature called Speaker's Corner. Basically, you feed a buck or two into the machine and you get a minute or so to say what's on your mind to the camera. The problem is, 98% of what you get is footage of drunk women pissing and moaning about how "all men are pigs."

(And then there were the guys who had a Speaker's Corner Top 10 List, every single one of which was - you guessed it - "all men are pigs." But at least that was satire.)

Was Terry Moore raised by Andrea Dworkin or something?

[TheTen-EyedMan]

Was Terry Moore raised by Andrea Dworkin or something?

Whoa...hardcore Lesbian slam from nowhere!!!!!

http://www.aperfectworld.org/cartoons/lesbian.gif

[howyadoin]

Whoa...hardcore Lesbian slam from nowhere!!!!!I'm not slamming lesbians. I'm slamming male self-loathing.

[TheTen-EyedMan]

I'm not slamming lesbians. I'm slamming male self-loathing.

I admit freely to loving myself at every oppoortunity I get. I just don't have the emotional stamina to drag myself through the day to day grind of a relationship with a woman.

[Gingold]

I'm not slamming lesbians. I'm slamming male self-loathing.

I always figured Moore's male self-loathing shtick was just a tactic he used to try to impress women get laid. Which I find kind of perversely admirable in a way if it worked. Still doesn't make Strangers in Paradise any good though.

[will_butler]

I always figured Moore's male self-loathing shtick was just a tactic he used to try to impress women get laid. Which I find kind of perversely admirable in a way if it worked. Still doesn't make Strangers in Paradise any good though.

Bingo. I really, really enjoyed SiP for a long time, even after it became completely obvious that Moore had no idea where his story was leading. I read the entire series through issue 76 or so. Then an issue started out with Katchoo delivering this internal monologue about never again being scared of men, and threatening some random dude in a park with a gun. I immediately dropped the book. It's like Moore's in a sophomore English class trying to get with the sorority girl who listens to Ani Difranco. The sad thing is that I'm curious as to how the thing is going to wrap up pretty soon, but I'll be damned if I'm going to give him money for a crappy grrl power journal entry.

Will

[Sean Walsh]

A lot of Warren Ellis' stuff worked for me when I first read it and then suddenly lost its flavor. TRANSMETROPOLITAN, STORMWATCH (yet not AUTHORITY) and PLANETARY - read em, liked em, then got sick of em.

Also, I really wanted to give LOSERS a shot when it first began, but I could barely finish #1. I'd like to think reading the series now that it's done would be different a few years later, but I'm not sure....

[brundlefly]

My two cents:

Anything from Bendis or Whedon. I've given both plenty of opportunities, but their presumed "strengths" (strong dialogue) send me running for the hills every time. I can practically feel the self-satisfied smirks about how witty they think a particular line or another is while I'm reading it.

Hudlin's Black Panther. Though I wouldn't say that everyone is onboard that particular bandwagon except just me, thankfully. I was a huge fan of Priest's work on the character. Then this BET hack Hudlin gets his mitts on it and makes a foul mess of a previously great title. Not even mentioning his penchant for screaming "racist!" at anyone who has the gall to point out that he can't write.

Runaways. Ditto on Sean Whitmore's points about the annoying characters and the smug, simplistic worldview. And I love all of BKV's other stuff, but I guess you can't win all the time.

Invincible. I read the trade of the first five or so issues with all this massive hype surrounding it like it was going to be so groundbreaking and reinvent the wheel. Then I was left wondering if there were pages missing from my copy when I finished, because I just don't see it.

Morrison's New X-men. He not only didn't have a good feel for the characters and the x-universe, but you could tell that he didn't like them much, either. Not a good combination.

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

My two cents:

Anything from Bendis or Whedon. I've given both plenty of opportunities, but their presumed "strengths" (strong dialogue) send me running for the hills every time. I can practically feel the self-satisfied smirks about how witty they think a particular line or another is while I'm reading it.


Try Bendis' earlier pre-marvel stuff: GoldFish, Torso, Jinx.
Much better.


Invincible. I read the trade of the first five or so issues with all this massive hype surrounding it like it was going to be so groundbreaking and reinvent the wheel. Then I was left wondering if there were pages missing from my copy when I finished, because I just don't see it.

Hmm, wihtout giving anything away, you'd probably have to read the next trade or two to see where the hype comes in - there's a bit of a twist crucial to the whole concept that comes into it.


Morrison's New X-men. He not only didn't have a good feel for the characters and the x-universe, but you could tell that he didn't like them much, either. Not a good combination.

I thought he had a great handle and his love for them was apparent from first page to last.
Why do you think he didn't like the characters?

[Dan Apodaca]

I thought he had a great handle and his love for them was apparent from first page to last.
Why do you think he didn't like the characters?

I see that criticism a lot, and it usually turns out to mean that he didn't spend enough time fisting Jean Grey.

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

I see that criticism a lot, and it usually turns out to mean that he didn't spend enough time fisting Jean Grey.

This is why I always want it explained... it always seems to be because he didn't do what they wanted, or better yet, what they would've done if they were the writer.

[brundlefly]

Try Bendis' earlier pre-marvel stuff: GoldFish, Torso, Jinx.
Much better.

Are those crime fiction as opposed to super hero stuff? I have always heard that is his strength. I have a vague recollection of reading a run he did on SAM & TWITCH that was in that genre and liking it, then being turned off by DAREDEVIL and ULTIMATE SPIDER-MAN (yes, I realize that's blasphemous in some circles). I'll give the ones that you suggested a try.



Hmm, wihtout giving anything away, you'd probably have to read the next trade or two to see where the hype comes in - there's a bit of a twist crucial to the whole concept that comes into it.

I wondered if it was the kind of series that you have to stick with as it builds a story, but the written intro to the first trade acted like that first TPB alone was supposed to leave me reeling at its sheer awesomeness. Guess it might be a case of me just resenting the overhyping. My local shop has the second and maybe third INVINCIBLE trades, so I might pick those up and give that series another shot.


I thought he had a great handle and his love for them was apparent from first page to last.
Why do you think he didn't like the characters?

It seemed to me like he just grabbed the few characters that he wanted to use (Logan, Jean, Xavier, Scott), brought in Emma to use as the prequisite sardonic Brit that every British writer shoehorns into a title (see Warren Ellis & Pete Wisdom in Excalibur), then benched everyone else while he stocked the series with his own creations (Beak, Stepford Cuckoos, Phantomex, the new Angel, the 'Special Class', Cassandra Nova, Quentin Quire, Xorn, Sublime). Some of the ones he hadn't selected for his attentions then ended up looking like prize chumps (particularly Beast and Magneto) at the hands of his new characters. I'm not some X-purist who compains whenever new characters get intro'd at the expense of older characters playing time, but this was pretty excessive. Particularly since none of the rich X-men rogues gallery got tapped and Sublime was always behind everything in the end. Plus I came away feeling like he only used Magneto (the only preexisting X-villain to get any screen time, unless you count Sentinels) only so that he could humiliate and kill him, a feeling which is given some factual basis in that interview where he calls Mags a "mad old terrorist twat." I'm not sure what the basis would be for such a grudge against a fictional character, but whatever. Finally, during his last X-story Here Comes Tomorrow, all these gene-spliced drones with mutant powers show up and my first thought is "This is great, now we get to see Morrison's take on Sinister." But no, it was Sublime yet again, except this time it was Hank who got the honor of being manipulated by Morrison's deus ex machina bad guy.

There were parts of the run that I liked, though (the Jean-Scott-Emma triangle, Cassandra body-swapping with Xavier and then leaving him in her comatose body while she hitched a ride with the Shi'ar and outed the Xmen to the public). I just had hoped he would do with the X-men what he did with JLA (great, iconic takes on the existing characters, awesome revamps for some of the villains, mind-blowing creative storylines, etc.). Instead, the series was sometimes unrecognizable as an X-Men title. But some people swear by it and say it's their favorite run of all time & it definitely inspires polarizing opinions and debates, which is the sign of a good work of art. Never said that it wasn't good; just that I wasn't on its particular bandwagon.

[howyadoin]

Plus I came away feeling like he only used Magneto (the only preexisting X-villain to get any screen time, unless you count Sentinels) only so that he could humiliate and kill him, a feeling which is given some factual basis in that interview where he calls Mags a "mad old terrorist twat." I'm not sure what the basis would be for such a grudge against a fictional character, but whatever.I can see a lot of your points, but do you think Magneto isn't a terrorist?

[brundlefly]

I can see a lot of your points, but do you think Magneto isn't a terrorist?

Oh, I'm not saying he doesn't technically fit the definition of "terrorist" by his prior actions, but Mags has always approached conflicts with the X-Men or the various Earth governments with an attitude of "I take no pleasure in this; I'm just protecting my chosen people from another Holocaust." And he had stopped direct physical conflicts since being given Genosha (the awful "Eve of Destruction" by Lobdell notwithstanding). In Planet X, Morrison had him rubbing his hands together in glee anticipating sending hundreds or thousands of humans to death camps and spouting Nazi-esque dialogue like, 'I wonder if they even feel pain like we do" (or something like that; I'm papraphrasing). Plus from his time supposedly hiding in the mansion as Xorn, he knew that humans didn't wipe out Genosha; Cassandra did. Are we to believe that he's evil, genocidal, and also stupid to boot? What was the point of laying waste to NYC, particularly when he had worked so hard to shed the terrorist trappings and become a legitimate political force for mutants as a world leader? Killing all those innocent humans in the name of mutantkind would only incite further violence against the very people Magneto has always sworn to be the defender of. Morrison seemed determine to hit us over the head with "By his actions, Magneto is a terrorist and is hence one-dimensionally evil; I will not allow him to be portrayed as a three-dimensinoal character or for the reader to sympathize for him." Then killing him off (again) immediately after that horrible rendering, as though he had slammed the book shut on the character and was daring later writers to be able to redeem him again after that. I'm no fan of retcons and I agree with the Morrison fans who compain about Marvel working double-time to erase all the changes that he made during his run, but not on the Mags issue. I was relieved at the "nope, wasn't him" followup so we wouldn't have to suffer through years of "how can you justify what you did in New York?" every time he showed up.

And I'm not in any way, shape or form defending real-world terrorism in this post. This is a fictional comic book character in a fictional comic book universe where previous characters have murdered scores and scores of people and then been later redeemed with explanations of "evil imposter/mind-controlled/powers make him unstable/framed by his enemies" and everyone just nods in assent and trusts said character implicitly afterwards. Mags has never sent mutant suicide bombers into civilian areas or murdered innocents to "send a message." His physical conflicts have (usually, depending on the writer) been with government forces who have fired on him first or provoked him, or with other mutants, who are more often than not labeled "terrorists" themselves. Any correlation between real-world terrorists and Marvel characters are more apt with Red Skull or Hydra and others of that ilk.

[TheTen-EyedMan]

I see that criticism a lot, and it usually turns out to mean that he didn't spend enough time fisting Jean Grey.

:eek:

What?

[dancj]

I was a huge fan of Priest's work on the character.

Funnily enough I could easily list all of Priests work that I've read (including Black Panther) on this thread. I've just never managed to like any of it. And it was particularly bad when he changed his name and I thought the great scottish writer called Christopher Priest was writing The Ray. I was dissapointed to find a mediocre story and then som text at the back explaining that the book was really written by James Owsely whose work I'd always hated

[Michael P]

This is why I always want it explained... it always seems to be because he didn't do what they wanted, or better yet, what they would've done if they were the writer.
Dingdingding! We have a winner!

[yeoman]

This is why I always want it explained... it always seems to be because he didn't do what they wanted, or better yet, what they would've done if they were the writer.


I just didn't like it cause it didn't feel like an X-men book to me.

Granted, very little done in the X-books over the last fifteen years has that feel to me, so I'm not sure I could tell you what, exactly, I think and X-men book is.

All I know is, I didn't like most of what I read of Morrison's run.

[brundlefly]

I just didn't like it cause it didn't feel like an X-men book to me.

Bingo. That's a more succinct way of getting across what I was trying to do with my earlier rambling. It's less that I did or didn't like what he did with the characters, or that he did what I wanted him to do or would have done if it was me. It's that he just didn't do anything with the majority of what he had to work with. Instead of seeing what he could have done with, say, Bishop or Warren or Banshee, we got throwaway joke characters like Phantomex and the "Special Class." Just kind of disappointing, especially given his tremendous talent and previous works.

[Gingold]

The Special Class were more interesting than Bishop or Warren were, just about ever.

I liked Morrison's portayal of Magneto. When you strip away Xavier/Claremont's mancrush on Mags, and all that tragic, noble, bullshit, what you've got left is a nasty old bigot who kills people because he thinks he's better than them. Claremont initially did wonders with the character by explaining his motivation and making him more complex and three-dimensional, which was good. But it got to the point where he was romanticizing the character, which went too far, I think. I thought Morrison's revelation that the new generation of mutants were much more interested in the idea of Magneto than they were in Magneto himself was very interesting, and had some real potential for future stories if Marvel hadn't undone everything.

[brundlefly]

Funnily enough I could easily list all of Priests work that I've read (including Black Panther) on this thread. I've just never managed to like any of it. And it was particularly bad when he changed his name and I thought the great scottish writer called Christopher Priest was writing The Ray. I was dissapointed to find a mediocre story and then som text at the back explaining that the book was really written by James Owsely whose work I'd always hated

He did what? I was only familiar with Priest's run on BP and The Crew, hadn't read anything by him prior to those. I guess the name change would explain why. What did he write as Owsely? Why would he change his name, particularly to the name of another well-known writer? I knew that there were two different "Christopher Priests," but thought it just coincidence. Did he give any kind of explanation for doing that? Since the only reason I can see would be the one you described, to dupe readers into thinking they were reading something by the well-known Scottish writer of the same name, and that seems a pretty opportunistic and juvenile motive.

[yeoman]

The Special Class were more interesting than Bishop or Warren were, just about ever.

Sp are most characters.

Warren Worthington's major personality trait is "rich."

I liked Morrison's portayal of Magneto. When you strip away Xavier/Claremont's mancrush on Mags, and all that tragic, noble, bullshit, what you've got left is a nasty old bigot who kills people because he thinks he's better than them.


Or you're left with a nasty old man who thinks mutants are better than humanity because he's seen and experienced first hand the depths humanity has sunk too.

Both have been used. Frankly, I prefer the latter because it represents, IMHO, a more three dimensional character.

But then I got into comics on mid 80's X-men and New Mutants' comics.

[dancj]

He did what? I was only familiar with Priest's run on BP and The Crew, hadn't read anything by him prior to those. I guess the name change would explain why. What did he write as Owsely?
The only thing that springs to mind was a terrible kiddiefied Punisher rip-off in the 80's called Wild Dog.
Why would he change his name, particularly to the name of another well-known writer?
In the text page I mentioned he says he just did it because he liked the name, but according to Steven Grant, he had some personal reason for choosing that particular name. Also Steven said he didn't realise the name was already in use.
Since the only reason I can see would be the one you described, to dupe readers into thinking they were reading something by the well-known Scottish writer of the same name, and that seems a pretty opportunistic and juvenile motive.
I didn't mean to imply that he did that on purpose (which I don't think he did). That's just the effect it had on me.

BTW - I mistyped it. It's James Owsley

Dan

[TheTen-EyedMan]

RE: Magneto
Or you're left with a nasty old man who thinks mutants are better than humanity because he's seen and experienced first hand the depths humanity has sunk too.


I still think the best characterization of Magneto happened completely outside of the X-books. During the unfortunately half-assed Acts of Vengance, he attacked and imprisoned Red Skull in a walled up tomb because of his involvement in the Holocaust. That speaks volumes to how he should be portrayed and the hypocrisy that his "mutant genome good - human genome bad" stance exudes.

[BillR]

He did what? I was only familiar with Priest's run on BP and The Crew, hadn't read anything by him prior to those. I guess the name change would explain why. What did he write as Owsely? Why would he change his name, particularly to the name of another well-known writer? I knew that there were two different "Christopher Priests," but thought it just coincidence. Did he give any kind of explanation for doing that? Since the only reason I can see would be the one you described, to dupe readers into thinking they were reading something by the well-known Scottish writer of the same name, and that seems a pretty opportunistic and juvenile motive.

He was an editor at Marvel for a while and wrote Power Man & Iron Fist, among others, I believe.

[Dan Apodaca]

Bingo. That's a more succinct way of getting across what I was trying to do with my earlier rambling. It's less that I did or didn't like what he did with the characters, or that he did what I wanted him to do or would have done if it was me. It's that he just didn't do anything with the majority of what he had to work with.

That seems like a silly spin to put on it. If you remember, when Morrison's run was going on, there was also Casey on the Uncanny book, and Claremont on X-Treme. Claremont had certain characters he wanted to use, and for the most part, they weren't the ones that Morrison wanted. That's not him not using them, that's him being a considerate writer. There's a huge Claremont fanbase out there, and there's no reason not to give them a book with the characters they like.

As for the characters who were in Uncanny, I think it's a silly complaint. I mean, would you rather see a writer be forced to use characters he doesn't have any plans for or interest in, or would you prefer for them to write the best story they can?

Instead of seeing what he could have done with, say, Bishop or Warren or Banshee, we got throwaway joke characters like Phantomex and the "Special Class." Just kind of disappointing, especially given his tremendous talent and previous works.

Those weren't throwaway characters. They had specific uses and purposes to the stories, and they were used for them.

[brundlefly]

The only thing that springs to mind was a terrible kiddiefied Punisher rip-off in the 80's called Wild Dog.

*laughs* I think I actually remember some covers from that series. Looked very Punisher-lite.


In the text page I mentioned he says he just did it because he liked the name, but according to Steven Grant, he had some personal reason for choosing that particular name. Also Steven said he didn't realise the name was already in use.

Oh, okay then. I didn't know if this name-change thing was some big comics scandal that I was unaware of, and was not familiar with his work as Owsley.


I didn't mean to imply that he did that on purpose (which I don't think he did).

You didn't. That was just the first thing that jumped to mind for me as a motive, since I didn't know any details.

[Gingold]

Wild-Dog was Max Allan Collins, I think. Owsley wrote Green Lantern in Action Comics Weekly around that time .

[brundlefly]

Was his work as Owsley heavily political & conspiracy-driven like BP or more standard super-hero adventures?

[Gingold]

Was his work as Owsley heavily political & conspiracy-driven like BP or more standard super-hero adventures?

I don't remember him doing much that overtly political. Mostly it just wasn't very good. He became a better writer when he became Priest.

[dancj]

Wild-Dog was Max Allan Collins, I think. Owsley wrote Green Lantern in Action Comics Weekly around that time .

Oh arse - I always get those two mixed up.

In that case I have nothing other than a vague memory of not liking his DC work and more recent memory of not liking Black Panther

[SUPERECWFAN1]

Yes Priest ( Owsley ) did have a run on Powerman & Iron Fist in the early 80's. I'm getting those back issues when I can.


You know whose work is hot/cold for me ? Joe Casey.

I've seen people swear to me there was some genuis in his Uncanny X-Men run from #394-#409 but I can't see it. The entire thing was absolute horrid. People have told me his Wildcats run was awesome but I still can't understand why some like this.

[suedenim]

I don't remember him doing much that overtly political. Mostly it just wasn't very good. He became a better writer when he became Priest.

As far as I can remember, Owsley's Spider-Man stuff wasn't even vaguely political. My memory is that his Spidey stuff was average for the day - neither especially good nor especially bad.

[brundlefly]

Casey's run was the one that started out with an uninspired Morlock Massacre ripoff and a subplot of Chamber dating a Britney Spears lookalike, right? If so, then I totally agree with you on that one. His Wildcats run was indeed awesome, and I liked other works of his (Iron Man: The Inevitable, Godland, his run on Cable), but there was certainly no 'genius' to be found in his X-work. It's strange that many writers whose work I really enjoy on other titles, like Casey, Morrison and Peter Milligan, didn't really bring their A-game to the X-titles during their runs and the results were underwhelming. Mike Carey and Ed Brubaker (both of whose non-X-Men work I am a big fan of) are both doing very well starting off on their respective titles at the moment, but it's too early in their runs to make any judgements. I hope they can both keep up consistently good stories, since this is the first time I've found myself reading both core X-books in a long while.

[stealthwise]

I find a lot of these dislikes to be... well, not be, but SEEM to be, like reacting to overhype.

Invincible is a book that I read and it seemed competent, but I found myself disliking it, because everyone was screaming about how frigging great it was. Same with Walking Dead. At the time I had extra cash, so I picked up the second and third volumes of those titles.

Over time, I've found that I really enjoy Invincible, but hate Walking Dead. Neither deserve the praise they get, in my own unhumble opinion.

Most titles seem to face some major backlash, due to their fans being far too loud.

Except Strangers in Paradise. That title completely sucks, and I love and agree with everything Howya said about it.

[Sean Whitmore]

I find a lot of these dislikes to be... well, not be, but SEEM to be, like reacting to overhype.

Invincible is a book that I read and it seemed competent, but I found myself disliking it, because everyone was screaming about how frigging great it was. Same with Walking Dead. At the time I had extra cash, so I picked up the second and third volumes of those titles.


Same here. Invincilbe is a very "okay" book, and that's about it. I don't know how someone reads that and it causes them to think Robert Kirkman should be writing every comic book in the world. Such praise can't do anything but make his work suffer in comparison.


SEAN

[howyadoin]

I just didn't like it cause it didn't feel like an X-men book to me.Of course it didn't. Morrison doesn't write like a generic X-book writer. If he did, what would be the point of hiring him in the first place?

[brundlefly]

Same here. Invincilbe is a very "okay" book, and that's about it. I don't know how someone reads that and it causes them to think Robert Kirkman should be writing every comic book in the world. Such praise can't do anything but make his work suffer in comparison.


SEAN


So, without necessarily spoiling anything, is there anything in Invincible that justifies the massive hype around it, or is it simply a standard teen superhero genre comic? I probably resented the first trade due to the overhype around it, but was willing to give the 2nd & 3rd a try if it was the case of the story improving as it goes on & I was just being impatient. I just don't want to waste my time if, as you say, it's just an "okay" book about a teen superhero.




I just didn't like it cause it didn't feel like an X-men book to me.

Of course it didn't. Morrison doesn't write like a generic X-book writer. If he did, what would be the point of hiring him in the first place?

Eh, it didn't really feel like a Morrison book, either, which was part of my problem. Like the sum of the two was, in the end, less than the parts involved in the equation. I don't necessarily think Morrison is totally to blame for that, as Marvel and the X-editors are notorious for interfering with writers' stories (Claremont's Shadow King saga, for instance) in order to "protect the franchise" or whatever, so maybe he was on a shorter leash there than on projects like Seven Soldiers or All-Star Superman.

[Reptisaurus!]

Eh, it didn't really feel like a Morrison book, either, which was part of my problem.


Really? It was pure science fiction based sociological allegory. Jes like the Invisibles or the Filth or (in a weird sort of way) Justice League.


Like the sum of the two was, in the end, less than the parts involved in the equation. I don't necessarily think Morrison is totally to blame for that, as Marvel and the X-editors are notorious for interfering with writers' stories (Claremont's Shadow King saga, for instance) in order to "protect the franchise" or whatever, so maybe he was on a shorter leash there than on projects like Seven Soldiers or All-Star Superman.

Yeah. I b'lieve Morrison mentioned being frustrated by the Powers That Be messing with his storylines.

And, well I don't wanna say the last arc was an impenetrable mess... But I sure-as-hell didn't get it. (Also the art blew.)

[Sean Whitmore]

So, without necessarily spoiling anything, is there anything in Invincible that justifies the massive hype around it, or is it simply a standard teen superhero genre comic?


Well, the 2nd and 3rd trades begin to develop a pretty shocking storyline, which is good. But surrounding it are your standard teen hero stories.


SEAN

[dancj]

Except Strangers in Paradise. That title completely sucks, and I love and agree with everything Howya said about it.

I like Strangers in Paradise.

I'll get my coat.

As for Invincible, it's not incredible. It's just good fun teen super-heroics done well, and really that's quite rare these days.

Dan

[hmnut73]

Invincible is good because most comic books are written like this “I have this really good idea for an action scene, now we need to write a story around it.” Invincible seems to go “I have a really good story idea, let’s see if it needs more action.” In Invincible having a good story idea comes first.

I could go on a tangent about the state of comic books but I won’t. I’ll just stay that Invincible seems to care more character development and good stories than merchandising.

[brundlefly]

Thanks for the Invincible feedback, Sean, dancj, and hmnut73. I probably set my standards for the first trade too high based on all the hype surrounding the title, but it sounds like from you guys that there is a good story being told there, so I may check out the 2nd and 3rd trades.

[howyadoin]

Except Strangers in Paradise. That title completely sucks, and I love and agree with everything Howya said about it.I wish I could remember Pól Rua's original rant on it from a few years ago. He did this brilliant impression of it.

[Gilda Dent]

Morrison has always been hit or miss with me. I read glowing reviews of Seaguy, then looked at it couldn't come up with anything more than "Huh?" I've tried Morrison's run on Doom Patrol and again couldn't connect.

I like or love most of the others mentioned in this thread.

GILDA

[DubipR]

Morrison has always been hit or miss with me. I read glowing reviews of Seaguy, then looked at it couldn't come up with anything more than "Huh?" I've tried Morrison's run on Doom Patrol and again couldn't connect.

I like or love most of the others mentioned in this thread.


Because Seaguy was originally supposed to be 12 issues, that would've told the backstory of the fallen heroes against the Anti-Dad and the origins of Mickey Eye's rise to power.

Doom Patrol took me two reads to comprehend what Morrison was accomplishing with the series.

[DubipR]

Damn double post...sorry

[Gilda Dent]

Because Seaguy was originally supposed to be 12 issues, that would've told the backstory of the fallen heroes against the Anti-Dad and the origins of Mickey Eye's rise to power.

That explains why it was such a disappointment, but doesn't really change that, as published, it doesn't do anything for me.

Doom Patrol took me two reads to comprehend what Morrison was accomplishing with the series.

Once was enough for me. I didn't see much reason to return.

GILDA

[howyadoin]

Once was enough for me. I didn't see much reason to return.You only read your comics once?

[TheTen-EyedMan]

You only read your comics once?

That's nothing. I have comics I bought during the death throes of the pre-Didio reign that I didn't even read. Most of it Ed Brubaker Batman and Greg Rucka Detective stuff. I guess I just didn't agree with how they offed Vesper Fairchild.

:

[Gilda Dent]

You only read your comics once?

It depends on how much I got out of them the first time through. If I didn't enjoy them and/or didn't see something else of value in them, I don't want to waste my time by rereading when there are others I haven't read or would enjoy rereading.

GILDA

[Dan Apodaca]

Funny, with a major theme in Doom Patrol being the process of recognizing all the aspects of yourself (including the ones that feel wrong and the ones you can't understand), and learning to assimilate them into your way of being, I would think you would love it, Gilda.

[Gilda Dent]

Funny, with a major theme in Doom Patrol being the process of recognizing all the aspects of yourself (including the ones that feel wrong and the ones you can't understand), and learning to assimilate them into your way of being, I would think you would love it, Gilda.

The theme appeals to me, sure. It's one of the appeals of the original Doom Patrol stories for me, the better ones, anyway.

The execution, not so much, or at least not what I remember of it. I'm not even sure which issues I had (I sold them in my idiotic "I'm too mature for comic books" phase when I finished college) but I do remember thinking at the time, about ten years ago, that it seemed like a bunch of weirdness for weirdness' sake.

GILDA

[howyadoin]

That's nothing. I have comics I bought during the death throes of the pre-Didio reign that I didn't even read. Most of it Ed Brubaker Batman and Greg Rucka Detective stuff. I guess I just didn't agree with how they offed Vesper Fairchild.Why not just set your money on fire and throw it at homeless people?

[TheTen-EyedMan]

Why not just set your money on fire and throw it at homeless people?

Ah, the Joe Leiberman school of politics.

Oh, sorry...too soon?

Anyway...I gave them all a good home.

[howyadoin]

Anyway...I gave them all a good home.Yeah, but why buy them in the first place if you don't like them? Why not spend the money on something you do like, instead?

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

It depends on how much I got out of them the first time through. If I didn't enjoy them and/or didn't see something else of value in them, I don't want to waste my time by rereading when there are others I haven't read or would enjoy rereading.

GILDA


I re-read books if I hated it and everyone else raves, or if I was just confused by the end.
Just so I can tell if I was at fault, or it was just a bad book.
If I hadn't done this I never would've got to enjoy the delights of many books, including The Invisibles, Automatic Kafka*, the last New X-men arc*, From Hell and many others.


*I've always had problems with Pipeline because Augie gave both of these bad reviews because they didn't make sense - when all that was needed was a re-read to realise that it did make perfect sense, it just wasn't a standard narrative (AK was just, well AK, and the last New X-men arc wasn't standalone).

[TheTen-EyedMan]

Yeah, but why buy them in the first place if you don't like them? Why not spend the money on something you do like, instead?

Habit, pure and simple. I accepted third best.

Some of those comics were a serious waste of precious paper.

[dancj]

but I do remember thinking at the time, about ten years ago, that it seemed like a bunch of weirdness for weirdness' sake.


It felt like that to me sometimes when it was coming out (oh look another guy with a floating inanimate object for a head), but when I reread them a few years later, I found the stories themselves were very good. It's just that the wierdness often hid them a bit - I think it's a kind of sleight of hand thing Morrison had going. Doom Patrol was capable of being very moving

Dan

[TheTen-EyedMan]

It felt like that to me sometimes when it was coming out (oh look another guy with a floating inanimate object for a head), but when I reread them a few years later, I found the stories themselves were very good. It's just that the wierdness often hid them a bit - I think it's a kind of sleight of hand thing Morrison had going. Doom Patrol was capable of being very moving

Dan

To quote Smashmouth

"It's all been done....before"

http://www.dragonhero.com/graphics/marvel2/dr-sun.jpg

[Michael P]

To quote Smashmouth

"It's all been done....before"

http://www.dragonhero.com/graphics/marvel2/dr-sun.jpg
That was Barenaked Ladies.

[Gilda Dent]

I re-read books if I hated it and everyone else raves, or if I was just confused by the end.
Just so I can tell if I was at fault, or it was just a bad book.
If I hadn't done this I never would've got to enjoy the delights of many books, including The Invisibles, Automatic Kafka*, the last New X-men arc*, From Hell and many others.

Sure I get that, but I need to see something there the first time through to give me a clue as to what's going on that I missed the first time, a reason to think that maybe there's something of substance here that I need to go back and dig out.

For example, the first time I saw Starship Troopers, I thought it sucked badly in part because I went in expecting it to be like the book, or have some of the same flavor at least. It wasn't until very near the end that something clicked and I saw that maybe something different was going on here than I'd initially expected. By going back with a fresh eye, and hint as to what to look for, it all started to make sense, and I was actually able to enjoy it for what it was.

The same thing happened with Dog Day Afternoon. My first time I didn't understand that it was a comedy and kept scratching my head at what people saw in it. When I looked at it as a comedy, I thoroughly enjoyed it.

But I didn't see anything like that in, say, The Big Lebowski, so I never went back for a second helping.

I knew about 2/3 of the way through The Invisibles that a second reading was going to be required to get the full impact of what was going on, likewise most of the Sandman arcs and Alan Moore's Swamp Thing, though I did enjoy each of those at the surface level the first time.


It felt like that to me sometimes when it was coming out (oh look another guy with a floating inanimate object for a head), but when I reread them a few years later, I found the stories themselves were very good. It's just that the wierdness often hid them a bit - I think it's a kind of sleight of hand thing Morrison had going. Doom Patrol was capable of being very moving

Dan

Hmmmm. Ok, well, maybe I missed something the first time through. E-bay doesn't seem to have a set up right now, but I'll make note of it and if a cheap set comes up, I'll give it a try.

Is there any particular section that would make a good intro?

GILDA

[cactusmaac]

I can't read Astonishing X-Men or anything else by Joss Whedon. He can write nice moments but the overall work is lost on me. It just seems like it's written by a smart-ass fanboy.

I can see why Peter David has a fanbase, but apart from Spider-Man 2099, nothing he's done appeals to me.

Joe Casey is a lot of sizzle but no steak.

Greg Rucka is quite easily the most boring and flaccid writer I've encountered in years.

[howyadoin]

The same thing happened with Dog Day Afternoon. My first time I didn't understand that it was a comedy...It was?

.

[howyadoin]

Some of those comics were a serious waste of precious paper.My point exactly. You could've saved a tree and spent the money on...

I dunno, hookers and blow.

[TheTen-EyedMan]

It was?

.

In the same vein as American Psycho.

You watch that film as a drama then it's complete shit.

As a very, very, very broad black comedy...it's piss your pants funny.


Any film that can have these lines in it is seriously funny.

Patrick Bateman: I don't think we should see each other any more.
Evelyn Williams: Why? What's wrong?
Patrick Bateman: I need to engage in homicidal behaviour on a massive scale. It can not be corrected but I have no other way to fulfill my needs.


And it gave us the definitive Batman in Chris Bale.

Pity the sequel looks like shitsville.

[brundlefly]

In the same vein as American Psycho.

You watch that film as a drama then it's complete shit.

As a very, very, very broad black comedy...it's piss your pants funny.


Any film that can have these lines in it is seriously funny.

Patrick Bateman: I don't think we should see each other any more.
Evelyn Williams: Why? What's wrong?
Patrick Bateman: I need to engage in homicidal behaviour on a massive scale. It can not be corrected but I have no other way to fulfill my needs.


And it gave us the definitive Batman in Chris Bale.

Pity the sequel looks like shitsville.

Have you read the novel by Bret Easton Ellis that it was adapted from? If you liked the black humor and satire in the movie, you'll love the book. Lord know they had to cut enough of it out of the film to keep it from being rated NC-17. That sequel looked like a foul straight-to-video money grab. Swapping out Christian Bale for Jackie from That 70s Show? I think not.

One of my favorite lines from the book that didn't make it into the movie:
Bateman: "I'll have a decapitated....uh, I mean decaffinated coffee."

[Gilda Dent]

It was?

.

Yeah. A dark comedy with a good amount of pathos, and some laugh so hard you end up on the floor moments, the phone call to his wife, for example.

GILDA

[howyadoin]

Have you read the novel by Bret Easton Ellis that it was adapted from? If you liked the black humor and satire in the movie, you'll love the book.I'd have to disagree with you there. I think his writing is deeply shitty.

[TheTen-EyedMan]

I'd have to disagree with you there. I think his writing is deeply shitty.

Yeah...unfortunately Seth, the movie was infinitely better than the book. It was a well written, well structured and well plotted, piece of shit.

[howyadoin]

It was a well written, well structured and well plotted, piece of shit.That might be the greatest review I've ever read.

[TheTen-EyedMan]

That might be the greatest review I've ever read.


...........

[dancj]

Is there any particular section that would make a good intro?


Grant Morrison's stuff started in issue 19 so that's the best place to start - though when I used to give random people an issue to read it was always the Body and Soul (IIRC) issue with Monsoir Mallah and The Brain - just because it's funny

Dan

[Gilda Dent]

Grant Morrison's stuff started in issue 19 so that's the best place to start - though when I used to give random people an issue to read it was always the Body and Soul (IIRC) issue with Monsoir Mallah and The Brain - just because it's funny

Dan

Thanks. I know the first issue is usually the best place to start, but there are exceptions. I gave my wife and my brother Animal Man #5 to get them started on that run.

GILDA

[Reptisaurus!]

Grant Morrison's stuff started in issue 19 so that's the best place to start - though when I used to give random people an issue to read it was always the Body and Soul (IIRC) issue with Monsoir Mallah and The Brain - just because it's funny

Dan

Did the art get any better? I 90% of Grant Morrison's stuff, but the art in the first trade was such an eyesore that I couldn't finish it.

[dancj]

Did the art get any better?

Not really. There is some good art in the series by people like Philip Bond and Shakey Kane (aka Shakey 2000), but IIRC most of the art is by Richard Case. His art grew on me a bit and it suits the feel of the book so I'm not too fussed by that

[Dan Apodaca]

Did the art get any better? I 90% of Grant Morrison's stuff, but the art in the first trade was such an eyesore that I couldn't finish it.

The art's pretty lame for the majority of the run. But so was Animal Man. Trappings of the times, I guess.

[howyadoin]

The art's pretty lame for the majority of the run. But so was Animal Man. Trappings of the times, I guess.I almost think it was deliberate on Vertigo's part. Look at the Hellblazer issues that Will Simpson (I think) drew - they were goddamn horrible.

I dunno, maybe they were trying to distinguish themselves visually from mainstream comics. Not necessarily a bad goal, but shitty art isn't a great way to do it.

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

I'd have to disagree with you there. I think his writing is deeply shitty.

BOOO!

He's fucking hilarious, he is.