Part of What's Wrong with Superhero Comics Today

[JeffreyWKramer]

At Newsarama, there's an interview with Dan Didio, dealing with, among other things, the intent of IDENTITY CRISIS. The interview can be found here:

http://www.newsarama.com/dcnew/Didio/Didio02.html

Anyhow, there's a segment of the interview, specifically dealing with IDENTITY CRISIS and how "It was all about the tonality, and a big shift in the tone of not only the Justice League, but the DCU altogether."

Sayeth DD:Identity Crisis was about resetting the tonality of the DC Universe - dramatically. The goal was not just to reset it, but to do it within continuity. Make a story that mattered with the characters that was tough and dangerous, and it was. There was a brutal scene in that with Sue Dibny, but it was a scene that needed to be done because it was the motivation for so many things that came out of it. Because of the brutality of that moment, it forces the characters to behave in ways that they don't normally behave in. People say it was there for shock value - not really. If it was about shock value, we'd never mention it again. It's so integral to everything that the story was about, that it had to be done in that fashion. That's the reason that we did it. We didn't shy away from that scene. We couldn't shy away from the scene, because the whole story was built on that. Once we saw that our characters could still behave in the way that we know them to be, and still build on the histories that we know them to have, but act in a different manner, I felt that there was a lot of potential in our characters, and it was time to move them to the next level. Time to give them a different voice.

Okay, maybe I really am just old and obstinate, but does it strike nobody else as just perhaps wrong-headed, and maybe a bad idea, that DC overtly decided that the best event upon which to base the tone for the future adventures of magic princesses, alien supermen and guys with magic rings, and with which to use these characters to their supposed potential... is a brutal rape?

Now, some of the other stuff Didio says in that interview makes a certain degree of sense. For example, some of his comments about how playing superheroes for humor can also go too far, to the point it rather messes up some characters... I think he may have a point there, at least to some degree. But this overt decision - "Let's use a rape to shake things up and give the appropriate degree of seriousness to our stories" - sure strikes me as something of an overreaction to those concerns about things maybe sometimes going too far to the nonsense side of things.

Then there's the hubris of Didio's statement about the potential of these characters. What, previous writers and editors and such haven't really used characters like Superman and Batman and the Flash and Green Lantern to their real potential? And doing stories about rape and brainwashing of heroes somehow achieves this potential?

I think too much of this serious tone is not ultimately a good thing for superhero comics. Ultimately, superhero comics are about escapism, not reality or seriousness. Sure, it's realistic for tragedy to shake people up, but we can see that every day in the news - and, for all too many people, in daily life. What's wrong with creating a tone of wonderment and awe and optimism?

I'm having a similar reaction, though less so, to Marvel's current CIVIL WAR storyline. So far, it's a massively better-written story than DC's big events of the past few years (IDENTITY CRISIS/COUNTDOWN/INFINITE CRISIS) have been, but it carries a lot of this same tone - too much seriousness. A bunch of heroes screw up, a schoolyard full of kids get killed, the public turns against the idea of heroes doing their thing without government oversight and heroes end up fighting heroes. Yeah, I know Quesada and folk are going for relevance here, and I can't say some of this stuff isn't fascinating on some level... but I'm not actually *enjoying* it very much. It rather reminds me of how I was glued to the TV the morning of 9/11 - I want to know what's up, but I'm not having much fun, or geting the "gee, wow, cool" sort of vibe which superheroes seem designed to elicit.

What about others of you? Did folk like Siegel and Shuster and Gardner Fox and Stan Lee have it all wrong? Are the current directions taken by DC and Marvel pushing the classic superhero characters to their potential, or are they driving those characters somewhere else - and if so, where?

[Greg Hatcher]

What about others of you? Did folk like Siegel and Shuster and Gardner Fox and Stan Lee have it all wrong? Are the current directions taken by DC and Marvel pushing the classic superhero characters to their potential, or are they driving those characters somewhere else - and if so, where?

Mostly I tend to agree with you about the wrongheadedness. I did a whole aria about it a while ago here, (http://goodcomics.comicbookresources.com/2005/12/24/friday-on-the-stairs/) for what it's worth.

[Expletive Deleted]

That and the distinct lack of giant monkeys with laser vision.

[StoneGold]

On the other hand, kiddies ain't reading, and they do love their brutal rapes.

[Ray R.]

I agree with you, Jeffrey. It's justification for justification's sake.

And while I couldn't pick Didio out of a line-up, his end notes at the end of regular D.C. comic books makes me think more and more of him as an self-aggrandizing, arrogant prick. Seriously, buddy, get over yourself. I know it makes you happy to be named honorary coach of the D.C. softball team, but really, no really, I could give a flying fuck. I know you're supposed to spout hyperbole about how great your books are, but at least pretend to have one humble bone in your body. Do these guys really think that we care the least bit about Marvel versus D.C. anymore? Frankly, that went out of style when disco died. Creators switch companies like the rest of us switch long distance carriers, so trying to convince us that one company is better than the other in terms of quality is pretty much a waste of time. Anyway, end of the Didio rant.

As to a brutal rape being the lodestone of the D.C. universe, that's a load of horse manure. It was ultimately unnecessary, and tied into Crisis, how exactly? By pissing off Superman-2, and contributing to Superboy Prime's mental condition? Yup, couldn't write that any other way but by brutally raping a secondary character who was married to a second banana superhero. Shock value? More like exploitation, Dan. When you take a horrific event and use it to sell spinoffs and limited series, that's called exploitation, plain and simple. So stop spraying perfume on a turd, and heading criticism off at the pass by declaring it absolutely necessary to the narrative. It was absolutely unnecessary, was creatively and commercially exploitative and achieved absolutely nothing but animosity from people who have been reading D.C. comics for thirty years or more.

You want to be proud of something that calls on the much-missed Silver Age, settle for Darwyn Cooke's "New Frontier." That took the best that the Silver Age had to offer, and combined it with modern storytelling technique, both narratively and artisticly. And lo and behold, Cooke ignored continuity and still told a compelling story. Was nothing learned from that?

[Adam Crocker]

\Yeah, I know Quesada and folk are going for relevance here, and I can't say some of this stuff isn't fascinating on some level... but I'm not actually *enjoying* it very much. It rather reminds me of how I was glued to the TV the morning of 9/11 - I want to know what's up, but I'm not having much fun, or geting the "gee, wow, cool" sort of vibe which superheroes seem designed to elicit.

Yes, and as Paul O'Brian argued on X-Axis (http://www.thexaxis.com/misc/civilwar1.htm) it actually doesn't have the relevance they are looking for since in reality the anti-registration side is arguing for giving free reign to vigilantism with their only argument being "that's how it always worked!" All it really seems to do is play around with genre conventions by applying real world logic to them and even then only tenuously.

[darkkeeperjr]

Seems to me that comics are trying to leave the 'kids level' and go to the "adult level" Did they really want kids to open a comic book with superman on the cover and see a rape? I kind of like the way the books are getting more serious and gritty.

Still,I don't want to see superman curse out a little girl.I very much doubt that would happen,But I seen superboy become a villian and kill some heros.

What are they gonna do two years from now to top the rape? Getting a little serious is alright for me. As long as the writers don't go over the top.

[Gaz]

I'm always torn when this stuff is discussed. I got into comics much later, both age-wise, and just time-wise, than I suspect most posters did. As such, my perspective tends to skew towards liking the basic structure and the more mature tone that modern comics have. I have some Showcase and Essentials, but they're mainly for kitsch value. New Teen Titans and Claremont's X-Men are probably the earliest I'd really go for any lengthy reading stretches.

But I don't like the idea that DC seems to have, of building on stories without fun or hope. And I do think there's room for darker, more adult tales and brighter, simpler, kiddy-oriented stuff. I enjoy Daredevil AND Power Pack, for cripes' sake. So, I'd like to think there's a middle ground, and I'd certainly welcome scrapping, or sidelining, Identity Crisis...

[Adam Crocker]

Seems to me that comics are trying to leave the 'kids level' and go to the "adult level" Did they really want kids to open a comic book with superman on the cover and see a rape? I kind of like the way the books are getting more serious and gritty.

Well not comics so much as superhero comics. Other comics like 100 Bullets, Berlin, and Hellblazer have already been catering to an adult fan base for years and arguably with material that's a better fit for those aims.

[Gaz]

Yes, and as Paul O'Brian argued on X-Axis (http://www.thexaxis.com/misc/civilwar1.htm) it actually doesn't have the relevance they are looking for since in reality the anti-registration side is arguing for giving free reign to vigilantism with their only argument being "that's how it always worked!" All it really seems to do is play around with genre conventions by applying real world logic to them and even then only tenuously.
I haven't been able to find a copy of CW #2, but I thought they were going for "And what if the government decides protestors are the bad guys? Or decides that Joe Bloggs should be detained as a "security risk"?"?

[Gaz]

Well not comics so much as superhero comics. Other comics like 100 Bullets, Berlin, and Hellblazer have already been catering to an adult fan base for years and arguably with material that's a better fit for those aims.
...This probably won't end with either of us happy, but every time this is brought up, it bugs me, because it's almost dismissing the great stories aimed at that group which DO use the superhero genre. Alias, Gotham Central, big chunks of Miller (mainly Daredevil), you could even argue Morrison's Doom Patrol and Seven Soldiers and much of the Ultimate Marvel line.

[Gaz]

Double post...

[JeffreyWKramer]

Seems to me that comics are trying to leave the 'kids level' and go to the "adult level."

There's nothing at all wrong with doing fantasy tales which appeal to adults and contain content questionable or inappropriate for kids. George RR Martin's and Clive Barker's novels, numerous R-rated fantasy and SF films, most modern SF... it's aimed at adults. Same with lots of comics, including SANDMAN and HELLBLAZER and PROMETHEA and craploads of other stuff.

What's questionable is whether this is appropriate as the mainstream or "default" version of these particular characters. I personally don't see how characters like Superman, Green Lantern, Captain Marvel and the Elongated Man benefit from stories branching out from rape. We have MIRACLEMAN and THE AUTHORITY for that.

What's also questionable is how well these characters are served by injecting too many aspects of mundane reality into their tales. The settings of the Mavel and DC Universes really don't mesh well with our reality.

[JeffreyWKramer]

All it really seems to do is play around with genre conventions by applying real world logic to them and even then only tenuously.

If they go about playing with the conventions on more than a tenuous level - abandoning the vigilante concept, for example, in favor of registration - I think this does a great deal of harm to the setting and characters. It certainly tosses out much of the escapism. Beyond that, suddenly Spider-Man stops being about an individual who learned that "with great power comes great responsibility," and instead turns into a costumed cop drama.

I dunno about anyone else, but I'd prefer to keep having Spidey taunt and banter with his foes, rather than worry about reading them their Miranda rights. Next step from there would be, what, Ms. Marvel dealing with hemorrhoids because her shorts keep riding up during combat?

[Smarty Jones]

I really don't care to see stories where superheroes have similar morals to supervillains, where gory and excessive violence prevails and nonsensical snuff is being passed off as "character development." IMO, the DC Universe ruined itself first with "Identity Crisis" and then a turn of events that lead to a knock-off, untying of "Crisis on Inifinite Earths."

[Alan2099]

It's shock for shock's sake at the basic level, but from there, they've had to make it MORE shcokign than their last shock for shock's sake event, or nobody would be shocked (if that makes any sense.)

Ultimately, it seems as thought most superhero comics aren't even trying to sell to children anymore. They've all but given up on that and isntead are trying to focus on selling to a group that doesn't have the same kind of supsension of disbelif.

A big problem now is that they're trying to explain why certain stupid silly aspects have always worked or suddenly saying they don't work, which underminds the principals at best and takes away from the themes that it's all built on.

Right now, most comics are being directed by a group of people that don't understand their characters and are trying to force them into what they consider a more mature role. of course, they don't really understand what makes something mature either. They're just slapping on the violence, sexual themes, and political alegories and thinking that if they stick enough "mature themes" into a work, it automatically becomes more mature.

Super Heroes at their most basic are about people with funky powers and neat codenames flying around the city beating the crap out of each other. Their very nature is built on being immature. Stop trying to fight it.

[Adam Crocker]

I haven't been able to find a copy of CW #2, but I thought they were going for "And what if the government decides protestors are the bad guys? Or decides that Joe Bloggs should be detained as a "security risk"?"?

Yeah, but can you compare locking up protestors and guys going about their business to regulating people who take the enforcement of the law (or their own moral code) into their own hands? Vigilantism is not really comparable to the right to free speech or due process since it's about people deciding on their own what is punishable as a crime, and damn the rest of the world (or the right to due process). And this is what vigilantism has often produced in real life, particularly in places like El Salvador and Brazil where you have armed thugs shooting social undesirables. Really the Punisher is a more realistic version of a vigilante than Batman.

And realistically why would any government willfully allow people with super powers to run around enforcing their own personal codes of morality as they please? Guys with super strength or energy vision pose a very real security threat if they decide to use in combat situations without the sanction of law enforcement.

Which isn't necessarily a problem when you're talking the fantasy of many superhero comics, or even superhero comics that are aiming for realism. Though it's problematic when you try to inject it into a fictional setting where super-powered vigilantism is the norm and then argue that the government trying to regulate that is analogous to it cracking down on free speech. There's just no comparison and all it does play around with the assumptions of the genre's conventions rather than make a point about civil rights.

...This probably won't end with either of us happy, but every time this is brought up, it bugs me, because it's almost dismissing the great stories aimed at that group which DO use the superhero genre. Alias, Gotham Central, big chunks of Miller (mainly Daredevil), you could even argue Morrison's Doom Patrol and Seven Soldiers and much of the Ultimate Marvel line.

You're right. My statement was a bit too broad and didn't account for the exceptions enough. The main point I had wanted, but obviously failed to properly make is that comics themselves haven't been trying to leave kids stuff behind so much as superhero comics have been doing that. Mainly mainstream ones. I also wanted to point out that superheroes probably aren't the best way to appeal to adults as compared to say...Transmetropolitan or Strangers in Paradise. I did greatly enjoy Sleeper as well as Ellis' Authority (which was at least above the kiddy level).

On the other hand I don't see superheroes as being a very good fit for even adult fantasy. When it comes down to it, people dressing up in a colourful, skin-tight suit to bop criminals on the head is a bit silly. It seems like a tough fit for fantasy aimed at adults, and even harder in regards to the Marvel and DCU universes whose characters have largely been aimed at kids and whose setting reflects that. Daredevil got away with it. Batman gets away with it at times when done right. But can the same be said about Captain America or Superman? Or Spiderman? Or the Avengers, Elongated Man, or Green Lantern?

[LtMarvel]

Eh. I understand your complaints. I see them.

I also see that Identity Crisis was a well-written, well-drawn mystery. The best universal cross-over in quite a long time. If you ask me which I prefer, Zero Hour or Identity Crisis, I'll go Identity Crisis.

[Pól Rua]

Dan DiDio is full of shit.

Here's the deal, you know when you have play-doh and it's all bright and colourful, but when you mix it together it's a kind of khaki-brown colour?
That's the DC Universe.
If you feel free to tell all sorts of stories, grown up ones, kids' ones, funny ones, serious ones, tales of high adventure, tales of angst in the pants... you have a lovely rainbow of variety and wonderfulness, where you have the option of deciding which flavour you like and don't like. You can get the colours you want and ignore the colours you don't.
By mixing everything together like this and making everything the same, you've turned that lovely rainbow into a kind of uniform khaki-brown colour.

And you know what ELSE is that colour?

Got it in one.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Eh. I understand your complaints. I see them.

I also see that Identity Crisis was a well-written, well-drawn mystery.

Look closer then.

Batman and Mr. Terrific didn't think to check phone records?

Jean Loring just happened to bring along a flame thrower? And the combined analytic skills of everyone the JLA and JSA knows couldn't instantly rule out the various "burn" villains they were seeking out as potential murderers?

As mysteries go, IC stunk. Sure, it was better than ZERO HOUR. But that hardly qualifies as praise.

[Smarty Jones]

Eh. I understand your complaints. I see them.

I also see that Identity Crisis was a well-written, well-drawn mystery. The best universal cross-over in quite a long time. If you ask me which I prefer, Zero Hour or Identity Crisis, I'll go Identity Crisis.

That's like choosing the electric chair or getting boiled in oil -- neither one is good.

Are we talking about the same "mystery" that had the illogical reason why Sue Dibny was killed? Because The Atom's ex-wife wanted him to come back to her, even though previous books have shown that he would have come back to her in a second? Where she took a flamethrower with her "just in case?" And the practically impossible "connection" to Tim Drake's family?

Two words I use to describe "Identity Crisis" -- mean-sprited and dumb.

[Gaz]

You're right. My statement was a bit too broad and didn't account for the exceptions enough. The main point I had wanted, but obviously failed to properly make is that comics themselves haven't been trying to leave kids stuff behind so much as superhero comics have been doing that. Mainly mainstream ones. I also wanted to point out that superheroes probably aren't the best way to appeal to adults as compared to say...Transmetropolitan or Strangers in Paradise. I did greatly enjoy Sleeper as well as Ellis' Authority (which was at least above the kiddy level).

On the other hand I don't see superheroes as being a very good fit for even adult fantasy. When it comes down to it, people dressing up in a colourful, skin-tight suit to bop criminals on the head is a bit silly. It seems like a tough fit for fantasy aimed at adults, and even harder in regards to the Marvel and DCU universes whose characters have largely been aimed at kids and whose setting reflects that. Daredevil got away with it. Batman gets away with it at times when done right. But can the same be said about Captain America or Superman? Or Spiderman? Or the Avengers, Elongated Man, or Green Lantern?
Yes. Yes (look at the movie). Heck yes. Depends on the line-up, probably not, and yes.

I think you're looking at the mistakes that have been made, the tacking on of T&A and blood to make it "mature". There's a way of appealing to the older portion of the audience without jumping back into the absurdity and oversimplicity of many older stories. Heck, you don't even have to have the setting be 100% realistic. How many kids watched Star Trek, even the modern versions? Those are certainly not aimed solely at kids, often not at all at kids, but it doesn't mean they don't enjoy it. Same with some cartoons, like Animaniacs or such, aimed at kids, but have stuff there for the adults, and are plain funny anyhow.

[Shellhead]

On the other hand I don't see superheroes as being a very good fit for even adult fantasy. When it comes down to it, people dressing up in a colourful, skin-tight suit to bop criminals on the head is a bit silly. It seems like a tough fit for fantasy aimed at adults, and even harder in regards to the Marvel and DCU universes whose characters have largely been aimed at kids and whose setting reflects that. Daredevil got away with it. Batman gets away with it at times when done right. But can the same be said about Captain America or Superman? Or Spiderman? Or the Avengers, Elongated Man, or Green Lantern?

I'm frustrated that some adults like Didio are forcing the superhero genre to conform to their adult needs, when there are so many other genres of comics that are more appropriate for adult stories. Modern fans often mock the silver age, but they overlook the diversity of comics in the silver age, including westerns, horror, science-fiction, romance, war, and more. Rather than asking for edgier stories in those kinds of comics, many modern fans insist that superheroes stop wearing costumes, stop having secret identities, and stop acting heroic. In other words, they don't really like superhero comics, but they are willing to destroy them to get other kinds of stories.

[Tommy]

Seriousness is over rated. But it sells (for some reason). I think it has more to do with comic readers wanting to be seen as serious.

Me. I am sticking with Nextwave. Give me killer kolas, insulting robots, superheroes on cell phones, giant dragons in purple underpants, English women with shovels, guys dressed up like Pteranodons, Captain America being sexist, and Cable's big gun any day.

[Smarty Jones]

"I'm frustrated that some adults like Didio are forcing the superhero genre to conform to their adult needs, when there are so many other genres of comics that are more appropriate for adult stories. Modern fans often mock the silver age, but they overlook the diversity of comics in the silver age, including westerns, horror, science-fiction, romance, war, and more. Rather than asking for edgier stories in those kinds of comics, many modern fans insist that superheroes stop wearing costumes, stop having secret identities, and stop acting heroic. In other words, they don't really like superhero comics, but they are willing to destroy them to get other kinds of stories."

I agree. It's like they are a group of brooding and desensitized loners who use the medium to convey some sort of unhappiness. It's like the goal of the story is to make the readers depressed or disgusted with what's going on. What also kills me is there seems to be some rationalization for painting even the most sanitized superheroes as having weak or a compromised display of character.

[StoneGold]

On the other hand, if this is really a problem for you, are you reading the Marvel Adventures titles?

[Gaz]

On the other hand, if this is really a problem for you, are you reading the Marvel Adventures titles?
Or the Franklin Richards and Power Pack specials?

[Jack Zodiac]

I agree with you, Jeffrey. It's justification for justification's sake.

Yeah. While the idea of a murder mystery starring prominent DC characters sounded like a cool idea, retconning an entire forty year stretch of comic book continuity to create some sort of invisible tension between members of the League was a horrible idea, and the catalyst of it being the rape of one of DC's most beloved female characters was even worse. What I don't get is how Dan can say, in one interview, that he wants DC to return to its Silver Age, and then here say that he wants the rape of Sue Dibny to set the tone for the future of DC. That's fucking sadistic.

Thank God for writers like Kurt Busiek and Keith Giffen. If it weren't for the hope that books would start being as fun as Blue Beetle and the newest Superman, I'd start giving up on comics.

As for Marvel's Civil War, while it's definitely a grittier, more realistic look at what a society with superhumans, mutants, and masked crimefighters would be like, it does tend to come off more like a monthly CNN report on "the worst thing imaginable in the world today" than a fun comic book.

And Jeff, love the new avatar. The King of Magic beats the hell out of the King of Pop. :p

[JeffreyWKramer]

On the other hand, if this is really a problem for you, are you reading the Marvel Adventures titles?


No. I'd like to see the mainstream line of books be better and to be appropriate for all-ages, rather than encourage all the side-lines.

I do get JUSTICE LEAGUE UNLIMITED, though.

[JeffreyWKramer]

And Jeff, love the new avatar. The King of Magic beats the hell out of the King of Pop. :p

I'm glad to be rid of Jacko, too, but he was appropriate for last week's avatar contest.

[Winslow]

Here's a quote from Peter David’s introduction to Supergirl Many Happy Returns TPB

. . . The problem was that the audience for which the writer were writing was no longer so clear cut. It was not just grownups writing for kids. It was grownups who had grown up reading kid stuff and were now trying to redefine that same material for themselves. Which is fair enough. Every writer should, first and foremost, produce stories that are of interest to him.

But whereas the old stories were written to appeal to the kid within the adult writer, the next generation was writing to the adult within the writer. Childlike simplicity blindly accepts the most preposterous story turns and developments, but the adult mind hews to a higher standard. Everything must make sense. Everything must be consistent with what’s gone before, lest the willing suspension of disbelief be corrupted. No longer is there an assumption that there will be a turnover in readership every four years. Now the hope is that the reader is there for the long haul.

The problem is . . . the world of comic-book super-heroes, by and large, makes no inherent sense. If you think about it too long and hard, the grand tapestry of bigger-than-life, long-underwear-clad crusaders quicly becomes unwoven for more reasons than I need to get into here. The writer’s realize that. And so they are driven to try to force the square peg of super-heroes into the round hole of common sense It’s an uncomfortable fit. And the more we hammer away, the more problematic it becomes, to the point where many modern super-hero comics have an internal schism. It’s almost as if the stories come not form a childlike joy celebrating wish fulfillment, but instead an adult self-loathing, generated by a world-view that cannot accept the simple right and wrong, black and white morality in which super-heroes functions best.

(Emphasis Winslow)

[Kid Omega]

Eh. I understand your complaints. I see them.

I also see that Identity Crisis was a well-written, well-drawn mystery. The best universal cross-over in quite a long time. If you ask me which I prefer, Zero Hour or Identity Crisis, I'll go Identity Crisis.

If you compare everything to ZERO HOUR, you're gonna get a lot of masterpieces.

IDENTITY CRISIS was poorly concieved and shittilly executed. It was dog poo.

Go read RED HARVEST and tell me if that piece of moron-bait holds up as a "well-written mystery". Go read any random FLETCH novel. Watch CHINATOWN.

Hold it up to an actual standard. It sucks balls.

[Pól Rua]

You had me at poo.

[LtMarvel]

Look closer then.

Batman and Mr. Terrific didn't think to check phone records?
Wasn't she on the phone with Ralph?
Jean Loring just happened to bring along a flame thrower? I took it that Jean was going to start a fire to cover up the attack. And the combined analytic skills of everyone the JLA and JSA knows couldn't instantly rule out the various "burn" villains they were seeking out as potential murderers?It was clearly written that the core satellite-era members sent people on fool's errands. And how would anyone instantly rule out Heat Wave? Or Volcana (ok, so I'm blanking on the fire villians)? Isn't common detective work is to round up the supects whose m.o. matches the crime and see if they have an alibi?

As mysteries go, IC stunk. Sure, it was better than ZERO HOUR. But that hardly qualifies as praise. It was better than Millineum... War of the Gods... Eclipsed....Bloodlines....Those giants that stomped around...

hmmm... is there a good crossover I can compare it with?

[LtMarvel]

If you compare everything to ZERO HOUR, you're gonna get a lot of masterpieces.

IDENTITY CRISIS was poorly concieved and shittilly executed. It was dog poo.

Go read RED HARVEST and tell me if that piece of moron-bait holds up as a "well-written mystery". Go read any random FLETCH novel. Watch CHINATOWN.

Hold it up to an actual standard. It sucks balls.Hmmm...can we agree that it is somewhere in between horrible and creme of the crop?

But to say it stunk...that's overblown...

[JeffreyWKramer]

Wasn't she on the phone with Ralph? As I recall, Jean called Sue and did the "travel thru the phone line" trick to get there. If Batman had bothered with phone records, the JLA would have known that Jean called Sue shortly before the attack.

I took it that Jean was going to start a fire to cover up the attack.
Because everyone just happens to take along flame-throwers.

It was clearly written that the core satellite-era members sent people on fool's errands.
Batman was there. So was Mr. Miracle, with New Genesis tech. A mother box should be able to do chemical analysis in less time than I take to write a sentence.

And how would anyone instantly rule out Heat Wave? Or Volcana (ok, so I'm blanking on the fire villians)? Isn't common detective work is to round up the supects whose m.o. matches the crime and see if they have an alibi?
A flame thrower emits chemical fire with distinct properties from, say, Heat Wave's gun, or Plasmus' corrosive touch, or various other people mentioned as subjects. It would eliminate subjects easily, or at very least drop them down the list - someone like Joker would be more likely to use a flame thrower than would Plasmus or Heat Wave.

It was better than Millineum... War of the Gods... Eclipsed....Bloodlines....Those giants that stomped around...

hmmm... is there a good crossover I can compare it with?

Good crossovers are few and far between. I agree IC doesn't suck as bad as WAR OF THE GODS or MILLENNIUM, though. Of course, I'm not sure YOUNGBLOOD sucked more than WAR OF THE GODS.

[Smarty Jones]

"Hmmm...can we agree that it is somewhere in between horrible and creme of the crop?

But to say it stunk...that's overblown..."

C'mon, The JLA having a shadow group that performed insidious mindwipes? A Superman who apparently knew about it, but employed a "don't ask, don't tell" hypocrisy? The group gang-attacking Batman, and wiping his mind? The Shadow-Thief taking on The Shining Knight, Captain Marvel and Vixen and then killing Firestorm?

"Identity Crisis" was not only full of idotic premises, but mean-spirited. That story is the poster child of the Peter David passage Winslow posted. A jaded exercise in trying to say that Silver Age trips of fantasy were really evil corners of the mind. I mean, characters like Superman, Batman and The Atom were not created to be in those type of stories.

[Corrina]

Eh. I understand your complaints. I see them.

I also see that Identity Crisis was a well-written, well-drawn mystery.

Bwhahahahaha!

Yes, one in which the World's Greatest Detective and the World's Smartest Man can't CHECK PHONE RECORDS.

[Smarty Jones]

"Wasn't she on the phone with Ralph?"

Jean Loring went through the phone wire, a la her ex-husband The Atom. Maybe it's me, but isn't it standard procedure to check phone records during a police investigation?

"I took it that Jean was going to start a fire to cover up the attack."

Save that Jean's intention wasn't to kill Sue Dibny, so why would she need a flamethrower "just in case?" She went over to scare her.

"It was clearly written that the core satellite-era members sent people on fool's errands."

That was after the funeral. During the investigation of the crime scene before the funeral, the likes of Batman, Mister Miracle, The Atom and one of the Metal Men were checking out the apartment. If I'm not mistaken, Animal-Man and The Ray were there. It's interesting that none of these characters were able to find one clue, yet by the final issue the revelation of the murder scene was depicted as so sloppy that it's unbelievable not one clue was found.

"And how would anyone instantly rule out Heat Wave? Or Volcana (ok, so I'm blanking on the fire villians)? Isn't common detective work is to round up the supects whose m.o. matches the crime and see if they have an alibi?"

A lot of them didn't have a reason to go after Sue, for starters. Also, the chemical analysis of the origin of the fire could be determined -- meaning a lot of villains could be elminated easily.

"It was better than Millineum... War of the Gods... Eclipsed....Bloodlines....Those giants that stomped around..."

It's hard to take "Identity Crisis" seriously when you have Jean inexplicably hire a contract killer to go to Tim Drake's house and kill his father -- especially when Loring had never met Drake, much less know he was Robin. She's been out of the superhero community loop for a long time and Drake became a hero long after she and The Atom split.

[Ryan K]

All this discussion about "fun" comics and "serious/real world issue" comics reminds we what I really dislike about Civil War.

The recent New Warriors mini series had them set up in a van traveling from town to town tackling supervillains in suburbia while being filmed for a reality series. Now I wasn't crazy about the idea at first, but it grew on me. Mostly because I thought it was well done nonsensical silly fun. And I liked that books like this and Cable & Deadpool, and Great Lakes Avengers, etc. existed in the same Marvel Universe as stuff like Captain America and Daredevil, etc. while not really interfering with one another.

But then Civil War used the New Warriors series, which to me wasn't meant to be taken very seriously, and used it as a springboard for this "serious/semi real world issue" book (and I use that term lightly I jut don't want to repeat all the things that have already been said about the book's concept). Where's the fun in that New Warriors book now. Now those characters are looked at as irresponsible murderers in the eyes of their couterparts and the MU public.

I can't even express how wrong I think using that as the springboard for all of the "Civil War" events was. Especially when some superhero group we'd never seen would have been just as effective. Why bring a silly book like the New Warriors' concept into this whole thing. Let them exist in their own little fun corner.

[Shellhead]

Bwhahahahaha!

Yes, one in which the World's Greatest Detective and the World's Smartest Man can't CHECK PHONE RECORDS.

I remember when DC used to stand for Detective Comics.

But Didio tells us that Identity Crisis set the tone for the new DC universe. Maybe they should change the name to Defective Comics.

[Gilda Dent]

Yeah, this is the kind of stuff that has me promoting JLU and the Marvel Adventures books in every other thread. It's like we're getting all of the negative effects of a shared universe, and few of the positive ones. It worked in early Silver Age Marvel because it allowed for guest appearances and things like the Spider-Man Human Torch interaction that served as the perfect metaphor for several types of interactions that occur in high schools between various kids. It allowed for sharing villains and team ups and team books. But always the shared universe was secondary to the individuals stories in the individual books. Now it's turned on its ear, and stories in individual books routinely must adhere to the standards of the larger universe, which makes them a lot less flexible, and a lot less fun, IMO.

To much emphasis on setting/plot continuity at the expense of charater and adventure.

Thus I end my standard rant on big crossovers, and once again say those not reading Marvel Adventures FF and JLU are missing two of the best superhero books on the market.

Gilda

[Joe Rice]

No. I'd like to see the mainstream line of books be better and to be appropriate for all-ages, rather than encourage all the side-lines.

I do get JUSTICE LEAGUE UNLIMITED, though.


They're not going to make more of it until you buy more of it.

[Joe Rice]

I've honestly given up on mainstream DC comics. They're doing their thing, they have their audience, that's fine with me. I don't give a shit anymore. Who am I to tell them they're wrong when they're making money? Sure, I'd love to read more good superhero comics, but there's a shit ton of good comics out there already. Let the continuity fans and their ilk have some fun. I've divested interest in the DC superheroes.

[JeffreyWKramer]

They're not going to make more of it until you buy more of it.

Yeah, I understand that, but at the same time, I want classic titles like, say, AVENGERS or AMAZING SPIDER-MAN or BATMAN to be okay for kids the age I was when I started reading them. Thus, I'm wary of supporting the separate kid lines, and prefer to support those occasional mainstream Marvel U/DCU books which actually are all-ages appropriate and don't suck. For the same reason, I don't buy ULTIMATE SPIDER-MAN, even though it's actually a better book than the Marvel U Spidey books have been in ages (or used to be, anyhow - I haven't looked at it in awhile now).

JLU is the exception because it's just too damn good to pass up.

[Joe Rice]

Yeah, I understand that, but at the same time, I want classic titles like, say, AVENGERS or AMAZING SPIDER-MAN or BATMAN to be okay for kids the age I was when I started reading them. Thus, I'm wary of supporting the separate kid lines, and prefer to support those occasional mainstream Marvel U/DCU books which actually are all-ages appropriate and don't suck. For the same reason, I don't buy ULTIMATE SPIDER-MAN, even though it's actually a better book than the Marvel U Spidey books have been in ages (or used to be, anyhow - I haven't looked at it in awhile now).

JLU is the exception because it's just too damn good to pass up.

People buy enough kid-friendly stuff, more stuff will be kid-friendly. Saw the Teen Titans Go trade today and the dress had a "GRAPHIC NOVELS FOR KIDS!" blurb.

Didn't use to be remarkable, that.

[JeffreyWKramer]

I've honestly given up on mainstream DC comics. They're doing their thing, they have their audience, that's fine with me. I don't give a shit anymore. Who am I to tell them they're wrong when they're making money? Sure, I'd love to read more good superhero comics, but there's a shit ton of good comics out there already. Let the continuity fans and their ilk have some fun. I've divested interest in the DC superheroes.

I'm heading more and more that direction. Even some of the stuff that's better-written, like BoP, I can't really enjoy because it's been poisoned by all the too-serious, rape-centered shit. I'm picking up DETECTIVE and Morrison's BATMAN, and I look at some other stuff here and there, but it's mostly pretty grim. That Winnick/Porter SHAZAM preview... *shudder* I bought the first issue of the WONDER WOMAN relaunch and it did nothing for me, though I'm going to give it another issue or two. I'm reading more Marvel right now than I have in a long time, though how CIVIL WAR pans out will probably determine whether or not that continues.

At one time, I couldn't imagine there'd be a time when DC was publishing Legion and Green Lantern books and I wouldn't be buying them. Right now, I can't imagine buying them. Too much water under those bridges for me at this point.

[Joe Rice]

Yeah, I read All Star Superman and I think that's it for DC until Seven Soldiers is back. I just . . .even the stuff that's written fairly well, it's not worth the time I'd put into reading it. It pays off less well than other comics that are better.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Saw the Teen Titans Go trade today and the dress had a "GRAPHIC NOVELS FOR KIDS!" blurb.

Didn't use to be remarkable, that.


That right there sums up so much of what's wrong with superhero comics today.

[Joe Rice]

That right there sums up so much of what's wrong with superhero comics today.

Good thing there's plenty of other comics.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Yeah, I read All Star Superman and I think that's it for DC until Seven Soldiers is back. I just . . .even the stuff that's written fairly well, it's not worth the time I'd put into reading it. It pays off less well than other comics that are better.

My ongoing DC books of the moment are JLU, ALL-STAR SUPERMAN, JONAH HEX, DETECTIVE, BATMAN and maybe WONDER WOMAN if that picks up (most likely not, if current trends follow). Plus I get some of the Vertigo stuff in trades.

JONAH HEX is pretty good, Joe. You might check that out.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Good thing there's plenty of other comics.

Yep, I'm not in any danger of giving up on comics, but I think it's a shame the superhero books have slid to the current state of things.

[Joe Rice]

My ongoing DC books of the moment are JLU, ALL-STAR SUPERMAN, JONAH HEX, DETECTIVE, BATMAN and maybe WONDER WOMAN if that picks up (most likely not, if current trends follow). Plus I get some of the Vertigo stuff in trades.

JONAH HEX is pretty good, Joe. You might check that out.


I gave it a look. Didn't do much for me. All in all, I'd rather watch an old western from Ford, Peckinpah, or Leone.

[Pól Rua]

Yeah, I understand that, but at the same time, I want classic titles like, say, AVENGERS or AMAZING SPIDER-MAN or BATMAN to be okay for kids the age I was when I started reading them.

Exactly, the problem with things like the DC Animated stuff and Marvel Adventures is that it's blatantly and obviously aimed at kids.

"C'mon kids, here are the comics that are safe for you to read!"

Kids hate that. They don't want 'comics for little kids'. They don't want to be condescended to and patronized. They don't want 'Spidey Super Stories'. They want the REAL Spider-Man.
And really, can you blame 'em?
Which is a shame, because some of the DC Animated titles really blow the regular stuff out of the water... and not just as 'all ages titles', but on their OWN level.

[Joe Rice]

Exactly, the problem with things like the DC Animated stuff and Marvel Adventures is that it's blatantly and obviously aimed at kids.

"C'mon kids, here are the comics that are safe for you to read!"

Kids hate that. They don't want 'comics for little kids'. They don't want to be condescended to and patronized. They don't want 'Spidey Super Stories'. They want the REAL Spider-Man.
And really, can you blame 'em?
Which is a shame, because some of the DC Animated titles really blow the regular stuff out of the water... and not just as 'all ages titles', but on their OWN level.

My kids always kinda liked the DC animated stuff. They preferred Veronica, Betty, and Simpsons books, but DC animated and All Star Supes were the only super books they'd even look at.

[jaguarshark]

I suppose we just need to vote with our dollars. For all the "superhero comics are dead to me" melodrama going around, it seems like there's still an awful lot of people buying stuff like 'Identity Crisis'.
As long as we all just buy stuff we really enjoy, the market will hopefully give us what we want. For example, I'm extremely tempted to pick up the new 'Justice League' ongoing, but I prefer to support 'JLU', because that's just my kind of superhero comic. Fun, heroic, adventurous done-in-one stories that mine DC's rich history without getting hung up on too much continuity or shock value.

[Jack Zodiac]

Unfortunately, that's usually not how comic book editorial staffs and marketing departments work. If they've got money and an idea, it's pretty much a go, no matter how dumb it is. Remember Marville? :rolleyes:

[Joe Rice]

Long as there's folks reading that stuff, they'll make it. DC and Marvel aren't too interested in growing their market, because it's too risky. So they'll keep making comics featuring children's characters for grown-ups until it somehow busts.

[jaguarshark]

For sure, there's some bad stuff out there. But, you know, there's probably someone, somewhere, who enjoyed 'Marville'. It's just a matter of finding the stuff you enjoy... I think there's enough good ongoing titles out there, that between them and the wealth of back issues and reprinted material available to the modern comics fan, we don't really have much reason to complain.

I mean, honestly, DC's post-IC continuity and the post-Stan Lee Marvel Universe don't really interest me much, but I still find superhero titles from those companies that I enjoy, like 'All-Star Superman' and 'Nextwave' to state the obvious.

All in all, it's a brilliant time to be a fan of the medium.

[Joe Rice]

For sure, there's some bad stuff out there. But, you know, there's probably someone, somewhere, who enjoyed 'Marville'. It's just a matter of finding the stuff you enjoy... I think there's enough good ongoing titles out there, that between them and the wealth of back issues and reprinted material available to the modern comics fan, we don't really have much reason to complain.

I mean, honestly, DC's post-IC continuity and the post-Stan Lee Marvel Universe don't really interest me much, but I still find superhero titles from those companies that I enjoy, like 'All-Star Superman' and 'Nextwave' to state the obvious.

All in all, it's a brilliant time to be a fan of the medium.


Very well said. Every month there's plenty to love. Mignola's writing Conan! Morrison on Batman! 'Beto just had a big one released! C'mon, that's just in the past couple of weeks!

[Jack Zodiac]

Busiek on Superman. Gaiman's new Eternals mini-series. And yeah, Mignola on Conan, bringing in some frog demon-gods for some crazy Lovecraftian mischief. And that was just today. :p These are tastes for older readers, though, and that's fine. That's who they're making these books for.

[Gilda Dent]

Exactly, the problem with things like the DC Animated stuff and Marvel Adventures is that it's blatantly and obviously aimed at kids.

"C'mon kids, here are the comics that are safe for you to read!"

Kids hate that. They don't want 'comics for little kids'. They don't want to be condescended to and patronized. They don't want 'Spidey Super Stories'. They want the REAL Spider-Man.
And really, can you blame 'em?
Which is a shame, because some of the DC Animated titles really blow the regular stuff out of the water... and not just as 'all ages titles', but on their OWN level.

I have to disagree with you a bit here. The Marvel Age stuff was a lot like you describe, but the Marvel Adventures stuff has corrected the flaws, mainly in that the artwork is more in line with the Marvel house style. Everyone looks like you'd expect them to look.

My kids from last year--"high" track first-graders and gifted fourth and fifth graders did like that stuff. Sure, they liked Archie and Simpsons and Bone, too, but the Marvel Adventures and JLU and my older Batman Adventures and Batman and Robin Adventures got a good workout as well.

If the kids have access to comics that are accessible without talking down to them, they're going to read them.

Gilda

[jaguarshark]

Originally posted by Jack Zodiac
These are tastes for older readers, though, and that's fine. That's who they're making these books for.

For sure, but I don't think it'd be that bad to be a kid reading comics at the moment either. Did anyone read this month's 'JLU'? I enjoyed that way too much for a 19 year old, so I'm sure a kid would really have gotten into it. The Marvel Adventures titles are supposedly great, and moving outside the obvious 'kiddie' titles, I'd have no problem recommending a kid pick up an issue of Dini's run on 'Tec, assuming it stays as good as the first issue. God, I was five or six when 'Knightfall' was happening, and I had no problem following it, so I'm sure today's kids can follow some done-in-one detective stories.

[howyadoin]

Dan DiDio is full of shit.

Here's the deal, you know when you have play-doh and it's all bright and colourful, but when you mix it together it's a kind of khaki-brown colour?
That's the DC Universe.
If you feel free to tell all sorts of stories, grown up ones, kids' ones, funny ones, serious ones, tales of high adventure, tales of angst in the pants... you have a lovely rainbow of variety and wonderfulness, where you have the option of deciding which flavour you like and don't like. You can get the colours you want and ignore the colours you don't.
By mixing everything together like this and making everything the same, you've turned that lovely rainbow into a kind of uniform khaki-brown colour.

And you know what ELSE is that colour?

Got it in one.Genius.

.

[Pól Rua]

I have to disagree with you a bit here. The Marvel Age stuff was a lot like you describe, but the Marvel Adventures stuff has corrected the flaws, mainly in that the artwork is more in line with the Marvel house style. Everyone looks like you'd expect them to look.

My kids from last year--"high" track first-graders and gifted fourth and fifth graders did like that stuff. Sure, they liked Archie and Simpsons and Bone, too, but the Marvel Adventures and JLU and my older Batman Adventures and Batman and Robin Adventures got a good workout as well.

If the kids have access to comics that are accessible without talking down to them, they're going to read them.

Gilda

To be honest, the stigma of comics for kids that treat kids like idiots has kept me from checking out the Marvel Adventures stuff, but that sounds pretty swell.
I'm not knocking all-ages comics, however, I think it's sad that, while there's some great all ages stuff out there, when the big two do it, it can end up looking like the 'playpen ghetto'.
Which is a crime when you see the talent DC had working on the 'Adventures' stuff early on.

Mmm... I loves me some Ty Templeton... (not to mention Scott McCloud and Evan Dorkin)

[Smarty Jones]

"Exactly, the problem with things like the DC Animated stuff and Marvel Adventures is that it's blatantly and obviously aimed at kids.

"C'mon kids, here are the comics that are safe for you to read!"

Kids hate that. They don't want 'comics for little kids'. They don't want to be condescended to and patronized. They don't want 'Spidey Super Stories'. They want the REAL Spider-Man.
And really, can you blame 'em?
Which is a shame, because some of the DC Animated titles really blow the regular stuff out of the water... and not just as 'all ages titles', but on their OWN level."

I agree. I started reading comic books based on the mainstream superheroes, not on some animated, overly cartoonish derivative.

[Pól Rua]

Don't get me wrong, frankly, I'd rather read the adventures of Animated Series Batman than the 'Goddamn Batman' or Batdick or Batgod or whoever... it's not about the quality of the comics...

'Cos JLU is, and the old Batman Adventures comic was, freakin' awesome.

...but how they're marketed, and how they're presented.
To me, the Batman Adventures Batman is a lot closer to MY Batman than that weird, psychotic, manipulative, joyless sociopath who's been walking around calling himself Batman for the last ten years or so...

[jaguarshark]

Originally posted by Pol Rua
Don't get me wrong, frankly, I'd rather read the adventures of Animated Series Batman than the 'Goddamn Batman' or Batdick or Batgod or whoever... it's not about the quality of the comics...

'Cos JLU is, and the old Batman Adventures comic was, freakin' awesome.

...but how they're marketed, and how they're presented.
To me, the Batman Adventures Batman is a lot closer to MY Batman than that weird, psychotic, manipulative, joyless sociopath who's been walking around calling himself Batman for the last ten years or so...

Good to hear! As far as the 'stigma' goes, I do see that, and I think it's something that's probably increased over the years. I remember when 'Batman Adventures' was in it's relative infancy (Parobeck, fuck yeah), the trendy thing to do amongst Bat-fans was to say you preferred 'Adventures' to the canon DCU Bat-books. (Of course, the fact that the Batman in some of the canon books at the time literally wasn't Bruce Wayne can't have hurt.) For memory, 'Adventures' had, and still has, quite the critical standing.
After the cancellation of the initial series, however, and it's relaunch under various guises, the last remaining Timm-verse title now falls under the 'Johnny DC' banner, which is where I think any 'stigma' comes from. Same with the 'Marvel Age' and 'Marvel Adventures' imprint, I guess.
I only 'discovered' JLU fairly recently, and so I'm on kind of a back issue hunt, but every issue I've read so far has been gold. The 'stigma' comes from things like the Johnny DC letters page at the back, although to me, that just adds to the book's charm.
Yeah, it's aimed at kids... so? As fans of superhero comics, I think we've all gotten over that stigma a long time ago, and I'm glad to hear so many people in this thread giving props to JLU.
I can't believe I said 'props'.

[Gilda Dent]

Marvel Age and Marvel Adventures are somewhat different animals. Marvel Age was cartoony, simplified art, and greatly simplified Spidey Super Stories type writing, while Marvel Adventures looks substantially like the core universe titles. The writing isn't even dumbed down so much as streamlined to make sure that there's a good amount of adventure in each book. It's accessible to a 10 year old without sounding like it's aimed at a five year old. And The Thing looks the best I've seen in any of his current incarnations.

Ok, I promise I'm gonna stop pimpin' the Marvel Adventures now.

Gilda

Power Pack is good, too.

[Alan2099]

There are some good marvel and DC books. I love Marvel-Team up, Thing, and Spider-girl, but it seems as if Marvel kind of treats those comics like they don't matter and ignores them, whioch does nothing to attract readers.

Anyway, myself I only buy the comics that I actually like. I've given up trying to have completle runs or following certain characters. I haven't bought a single Civil War comic, Spider-totem issue, or any of DC's recent crisis stuff. That's just not what I want to read. I want my comics to be fun, not bitter and cynical.

[JeffreyWKramer]

There are some good marvel and DC books. I love Marvel-Team up, Thing, and Spider-girl, but it seems as if Marvel kind of treats those comics like they don't matter and ignores them, whioch does nothing to attract readers.

Well, the poor sales on THING didn't help. And, I don't think one can really claim Marvel was unfair with SPIDER-GIRL. They gave that book numerous "last chances" to avoid cancellation, despite fairly consistent poor sales.

None of this is to say Marvel couldn't do better at marketing a lot of their books. They certainly could - and I wish they would.

Anyway, myself I only buy the comics that I actually like. I've given up trying to have completle runs or following certain characters. I haven't bought a single Civil War comic, Spider-totem issue, or any of DC's recent crisis stuff. That's just not what I want to read. I want my comics to be fun, not bitter and cynical.
That's they way to be. Buying to maintain a run of a title is a stupid idea, in my opinion.

[Michael P]

I remember when DC used to stand for Detective Comics.

But Didio tells us that Identity Crisis set the tone for the new DC universe. Maybe they should change the name to Defective Comics.
Depressing Comics?

[Ed Cunard]

I think you're looking at the mistakes that have been made, the tacking on of T&A and blood to make it "mature". There's a way of appealing to the older portion of the audience without jumping back into the absurdity and oversimplicity of many older stories.

Absolutely agree--it's one of those things that's been discussed often, that fans and creators saw that things like Watchmen and The Dark Knight Returns and thought that the reason those books worked was the superficial grittiness rather than anything else, and chose to emulate the surface elements rather than the craft.

The thing is, a lot of this is sloppy language in the direct market--sloppy language from fans, sloppy language from creators, and sloppy language from publishers that serve to build a nerdtower of Babel. All Ages and Mature Readers are phrases that have devolved into meaning almost nothing--"all ages" is now in many cases code for "Ok, we're writing this for kids mostly, but we want your grown up money, too," which implies that there's some shame in finding enjoyment in something written for a younger audience. Worse, "mature readers" is now often code for "Hey! Look! Tits and swearing and blood-filled explodey!"

And, yes, I do think a big part of the whole "Dude, Identity Crisis really is good, and you're wrong for not agreeing with that" goes back to people confusing quality with enjoyment--if you like it, fine, but people more able to discuss how it fails on an objective level as a mystery story have already gone that route, so I'll defer to them. I will say, though, that I get a little skeeved out at the comments like "Identity Crisis raped my childhood," as it demonstrates a severe level of fan entitlement.

Earlier, you mentioned Frank Miller's Daredevil as a more all-ages book, and I can agree with that. Dark and uncomfortable in parts? Absolutely, but it's also written and illustrated in such a way that it's not as "objectionable" in terms of age range as some people see today's superhero comics.

Old, long-winded rant on the topic from myself can be found here (http://thelowroad.blogspot.com/2005/10/quite-possibly-thinking-way-too-much.html) for the curious (fair warning, though--I get rather pedantic with dictionary definitions therein).

In short, I don't have a problem with superhero stories for adults, superhero stories for kids, or superhero stories for an all-ages audience. I think any medium (and any genre within any medium) can be used to tell stories for as wide or as narrow an audience as is desired by the artist. However, I'm with Jeff, Joe, Alex and anyone else who is bemused by the idea that constantly going to the narrowest of margins isn't necessarily a good idea from a quality standpoint or from a business standpoint.

[Shellhead]

I agree. I started reading comic books based on the mainstream superheroes, not on some animated, overly cartoonish derivative.

Same here. When they aim the product at kids today, DC and Marvel are sometimes overkilling, going for a painfully cutesy version that is apparently aimed at first-graders. Superhero comics by default will tend to appeal to kids, with the colorful costumes and wild adventures. There's no need to give the characters excessively large eyes and childish personalities. That still leaves a gap in the fanbase between 6 and 18, where you will lose the potential fans to other activities, like PlayStation.

[Gaz]

Absolutely agree--it's one of those things that's been discussed often, that fans and creators saw that things like Watchmen and The Dark Knight Returns and thought that the reason those books worked was the superficial grittiness rather than anything else, and chose to emulate the surface elements rather than the craft.

The thing is, a lot of this is sloppy language in the direct market--sloppy language from fans, sloppy language from creators, and sloppy language from publishers that serve to build a nerdtower of Babel. All Ages and Mature Readers are phrases that have devolved into meaning almost nothing--"all ages" is now in many cases code for "Ok, we're writing this for kids mostly, but we want your grown up money, too," which implies that there's some shame in finding enjoyment in something written for a younger audience. Worse, "mature readers" is now often code for "Hey! Look! Tits and swearing and blood-filled explodey!"

And, yes, I do think a big part of the whole "Dude, Identity Crisis really is good, and you're wrong for not agreeing with that" goes back to people confusing quality with enjoyment--if you like it, fine, but people more able to discuss how it fails on an objective level as a mystery story have already gone that route, so I'll defer to them. I will say, though, that I get a little skeeved out at the comments like "Identity Crisis raped my childhood," as it demonstrates a severe level of fan entitlement.

Earlier, you mentioned Frank Miller's Daredevil as a more all-ages book, and I can agree with that. Dark and uncomfortable in parts? Absolutely, but it's also written and illustrated in such a way that it's not as "objectionable" in terms of age range as some people see today's superhero comics.

Old, long-winded rant on the topic from myself can be found here (http://thelowroad.blogspot.com/2005/10/quite-possibly-thinking-way-too-much.html) for the curious (fair warning, though--I get rather pedantic with dictionary definitions therein).

In short, I don't have a problem with superhero stories for adults, superhero stories for kids, or superhero stories for an all-ages audience. I think any medium (and any genre within any medium) can be used to tell stories for as wide or as narrow an audience as is desired by the artist. However, I'm with Jeff, Joe, Alex and anyone else who is bemused by the idea that constantly going to the narrowest of margins isn't necessarily a good idea from a quality standpoint or from a business standpoint.
Actually, the Miller reference was pointing to that stuff as actually mature, thinking mainly of stuff like "Born Again" and "Man Without Fear". But I get where you're coming from. I should maybe have used Brubaker's Catwoman as that example. (Black Mask's treatment of Selina's sister and brother-in-law. Works in the story, but I'm not showing it to a 10 year old.)

And I agree wholeheartedly with the "any genre or medium can tell stories for any audience". The problem is, that seems to be a minority opinion, despite anime and Pixar and Brad Bird and Matt Groening showing people "Hey, cartoons can be for adults, and families and kids and everyone!", comics are stuck with younger fans (who're still teens/adults) wanting the grim n' gritty side but none of the fun, wacky, moe innocent stuff, and the older fans wanting the former but none of the latter. It's ridiculously possessive. "I don't want you reading my comics, so it shouldn't be like what you want!", trying to confine the appeal to their group, instead of expanding to include everyone, including the ones you don't like.

Going back to the animation thing. I've watched, and enjoyed, Akira, Batman: TAS, JLU, all of Pixar's output, Futurama, and Fairly Odd Parents. All are sci-fi/fantasy genre stories, many with superhero-like trappings. But they're all aimed differently and work, and coexist. Comics in a genre or subgenre like this can do the same, if only they'd try. (Marvel's sort of been doing so, with the Power Pack stuff, Punisher, Daredevil, Deadpool, NextWave, She-Hulk, Ultimate Spidey, Adventures and so on. Promotion may be unbalanced but output is encouraging, at least, to me.)

(I do NOT want to get into the pros and cons of the shared universe, as that always ends in tears. I like it, others don't; leave it there.)

[Gaz]

Same here. When they aim the product at kids today, DC and Marvel are sometimes overkilling, going for a painfully cutesy version that is apparently aimed at first-graders. Superhero comics by default will tend to appeal to kids, with the colorful costumes and wild adventures. There's no need to give the characters excessively large eyes and childish personalities. That still leaves a gap in the fanbase between 6 and 18, where you will lose the potential fans to other activities, like PlayStation.
I hate this. The fallacy that no teenager could possibly become a fan unless they're already one by age 10 or 12. I got into comics properly at around 15-16, reading the Marvel Ultimate stuff and Chuck Dixon's Nightwing. I've gotten a few others into comics too, at that point or older (Blair was 18 when I gave him a bunch of trades I didn't want anymore, and he got hooked on Ennis and Punisher)

[Ed Cunard]

Actually, the Miller reference was pointing to that stuff as actually mature, thinking mainly of stuff like "Born Again" and "Man Without Fear". But I get where you're coming from. I should maybe have used Brubaker's Catwoman as that example. (Black Mask's treatment of Selina's sister and brother-in-law. Works in the story, but I'm not showing it to a 10 year old.)

Well, we're both right--I was trying to show (poorly, I suppose) that all ages and mature aren't necessarily mutually exclusive terms.

And I agree wholeheartedly with the "any genre or medium can tell stories for any audience". The problem is, that seems to be a minority opinion, despite anime and Pixar and Brad Bird and Matt Groening showing people "Hey, cartoons can be for adults, and families and kids and everyone!", comics are stuck with younger fans (who're still teens/adults) wanting the grim n' gritty side but none of the fun, wacky, moe innocent stuff, and the older fans wanting the former but none of the latter. It's ridiculously possessive. "I don't want you reading my comics, so it shouldn't be like what you want!", trying to confine the appeal to their group, instead of expanding to include everyone, including the ones you don't like.

Pedantic attack: superhero comics are stuck (in part) with how you frame it. But that's still too general--there are also old fans that want the grim n' gritty, and younger fans that want the fun, innocent stuff. Even still, I think those two poles demonstrate a wrong dichotomy--it's not (or at least, shouldn't be) only an option between the McDonalds Grim 'N' Gritty Meal and the Burger King Whopper O' Silly Fun. I mean, shit, that'd leave out all the Haute cuisine comics I blather on about.

But, yeah, no matter whether or not I agree with a comic fan's stance on something, I don't like any kind of "ALL _____ SHOULD BE ______," because it strikes me as silly and limiting. I personally wouldn't be too upset if, say, publishers I don't read anything from like Avatar or Alias (or even Marvel and DC, as I only buy three books from those two companies) went tits up, but I'd be crazy to demand that they pack it in, or that people stop buying and enjoying them.

[Joe Rice]

But, yeah, no matter whether or not I agree with a comic fan's stance on something, I don't like any kind of "ALL _____ SHOULD BE ______," because it strikes me as silly and limiting. I personally wouldn't be too upset if, say, publishers I don't read anything from like Avatar or Alias (or even Marvel and DC, as I only buy three books from those two companies) went tits up, but I'd be crazy to demand that they pack it in, or that people stop buying and enjoying them.

Yeah. It used to bother me that so many superhero comics were so stupidly "mature." But, really, if there's an audience, it's no less legit than me and other folks like me. There's still a hell-ton of comics to love, just fewer of them with people with "Captain" or "-man" in their name.

[Forefinger]

I hate this. The fallacy that no teenager could possibly become a fan unless they're already one by age 10 or 12. I got into comics properly at around 15-16, reading the Marvel Ultimate stuff and Chuck Dixon's Nightwing. I've gotten a few others into comics too, at that point or older (Blair was 18 when I gave him a bunch of trades I didn't want anymore, and he got hooked on Ennis and Punisher)
It's good to know that you guys really are The Highlanders.

[Gaz]

Pedantic attack: superhero comics are stuck (in part) with how you frame it. But that's still too general--there are also old fans that want the grim n' gritty, and younger fans that want the fun, innocent stuff. Even still, I think those two poles demonstrate a wrong dichotomy--it's not (or at least, shouldn't be) only an option between the McDonalds Grim 'N' Gritty Meal and the Burger King Whopper O' Silly Fun. I mean, shit, that'd leave out all the Haute cuisine comics I blather on about.

Well, it was supposed to be general, just a brief summation of what I think of as a big dead-end. And "haute cuisine"? Someone's making his preference exceedingly clear... Personally, I prefer a decent burger or steak to a tiny shellfish with a couple of leaves.:p But there's room for the big menu, so long as the gourmets don't promote their choice by belittling the preference of the people they're trying to sell to. (Yelling at me "Why're you reading that spandex-prancing nonsense, read a REAL story by *hot indie writer/artist*, they're fantastic!" won't win me over, as they've opened with an insult...)


But, yeah, no matter whether or not I agree with a comic fan's stance on something, I don't like any kind of "ALL _____ SHOULD BE ______," because it strikes me as silly and limiting. I personally wouldn't be too upset if, say, publishers I don't read anything from like Avatar or Alias (or even Marvel and DC, as I only buy three books from those two companies) went tits up, but I'd be crazy to demand that they pack it in, or that people stop buying and enjoying them.
Wow! Someone's actually being sensible about this!:eek:

[Ed Cunard]

And "haute cuisine"? Someone's making his preference exceedingly clear...

Well, my preference has always been clear on that matter.

Personally, I prefer a decent burger or steak to a tiny shellfish with a couple of leaves.:p But there's room for the big menu, so long as the gourmets don't promote their choice by belittling the preference of the people they're trying to sell to. (Yelling at me "Why're you reading that spandex-prancing nonsense, read a REAL story by *hot indie writer/artist*, they're fantastic!" won't win me over, as they've opened with an insult...)

The same can be said of anyone dismissive of someone else's enjoyment--superhero fan, manga fan, altcomix fan, non-comics fan (and, boy, can I be dismissive at times!). But, again, my point tends to be that quality itself shouldn't be entirely limited to the subjective, personal enjoyment perspective, because it skews things too much. For example, is Identity Crisis shit because I, Ed Cunard (or Jeff or whomever), didn't like it, or is it shit because it's shit? I don't like the idea that the worth of the work is entirely on the basis of the audience, because it places primacy on the audience rather than the work. I love some really bad comics, movies, music and television shows that aren't any good at all, but I still enjoy them even if they fail by any objective measure of quality. That's why I hate the "raping my childhood" arguments--too subjective, too entitling, too emotional.

Really, though, I was just trying to be semi-funny--like haute cuisine, art comics and their fans are often referred to as pretentious, snobby, or elitist, so I thought the connection evident and apt (plus, my use of blather was an attempt at self-deprecation that may have missed its mark). I should have added a Japanese food manga thing (because you can go high culture and low culture with manga, too, just as you can get low and high end Japanese food) and maybe a le bandes dessinées French food thing as well. I mean, there's a high, middle and low end to any genre in any medium from any culture.

Wow! Someone's actually being sensible about this!:eek:

I'll go back to being a big jerk eventually, I'm sure.

[Corrina]

But Didio tells us that Identity Crisis set the tone for the new DC universe. Maybe they should change the name to Defective Comics.

People can certainly either enjoy or not enjoy Identity Crisis depending on their individual preference.

Objectively, however, it fails as a mystery on pretty much every level. There's lousy detective work with the phone records, there's the lack of explanation *in the story* about why Jean went to such lengths, and there's real contortions to work Jack Drake's murder into Jean's plot.

If the lousy mystery doesn't bother people who like IC, that's cool. But that doesn't make it a *good* mystery, by any stretch of the imagination. Just a bad mystery that you liked because plot doesn't matter/liked the villain banter/pick your own reason.

[Kid Omega]

Well, it was supposed to be general, just a brief summation of what I think of as a big dead-end. And "haute cuisine"? Someone's making his preference exceedingly clear... Personally, I prefer a decent burger or steak to a tiny shellfish with a couple of leaves.:p But there's room for the big menu, so long as the gourmets don't promote their choice by belittling the preference of the people they're trying to sell to. (Yelling at me "Why're you reading that spandex-prancing nonsense, read a REAL story by *hot indie writer/artist*, they're fantastic!" won't win me over, as they've opened with an insult...)


The sad point you seem to be missing is that as huffy as you get, you're still essentially admitting to reading books that are pretty stupid.

"Belittling your tastes" is kind of meaningless... what you like has no relation to what is quality.

[Joe Rice]

I also don't honestly see anyone doing that "SUPERHEROES IS STUPID READ THIS YOU DUMB JERK!" thing. I see a lot of folks complaining about it, but I never actually see it happen.

[LtMarvel]

C'mon, The JLA having a shadow group that performed insidious mindwipes? A Superman who knew about it, but employed a "Don't ask, don't tell" hypocrisy? The group gang-attacking Batman, and wiping his mind? The Shadow-Thief taking on The Shining Knight, Captain Marvel and Vixen and then killing Firestorm?

"Identity Crisis" was not only full of idotic premises, but mean-spirited. That story is the poster child of the Peter David passage Winslow posted. A jaded exercise in trying to say that Silver Age trips of fantasy were really evil corners of the mind. I mean, characters like Superman, Batman and The Atom were not created to be in those type of stories.
Ironic than that Peter David is on record saying it was a well-written story.

[Kid Omega]

Ironic than that Peter David is on record saying it was a well-written story.

Peter David is wrong.

[Gaz]

The sad point you seem to be missing is that as huffy as you get, you're still essentially admitting to reading books that are pretty stupid.

"Belittling your tastes" is kind of meaningless... what you like has no relation to what is quality.
No, I'm admitting to reading books YOU consider pretty stupid.

And that second statement goes both ways.

[Gaz]

I also don't honestly see anyone doing that "SUPERHEROES IS STUPID READ THIS YOU DUMB JERK!" thing. I see a lot of folks complaining about it, but I never actually see it happen.
In as many words? No. But KO's reply to me was hardly polite, was it?

[Kid Omega]

No, I'm admitting to reading books YOU consider pretty stupid.

And that second statement goes both ways.

Gaz, I don't even know what books you read or are defending.

But if you're thalking about the bulk of super-hero books, they ARE stupid.

This is not my opinion, this is an objective observation based on a thousand years of evolving litereary standards.

I love many of these books. But they're fucking stupid.

[Joe Rice]

Peter David is wrong.

Often, really.

[Ed Cunard]

I also don't honestly see anyone doing that "SUPERHEROES IS STUPID READ THIS YOU DUMB JERK!" thing. I see a lot of folks complaining about it, but I never actually see it happen.

As I mainly post on forums where most of the fans are fans of superhero comics themselves, the thing I see most is superhero fans belittling other superhero fans for reading superhero books they themselves don't like.

[Joe Rice]

In as many words? No. But KO's reply to me was hardly polite, was it?

You're clearly reading more insult into it than I.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Ironic than that Peter David is on record saying it was a well-written story.

That maybe says more about Peter David than it does IDENTITY CRISIS.

[Ed Cunard]

I love many of these books. But they're fucking stupid.

I know--you're way more of a superhero nerd than I am.

[Kid Omega]

In as many words? No. But KO's reply to me was hardly polite, was it?

Sorry- I was under the assumption that we were all adults that can deal with direct comments now and again. I didn't realize that I needed to put on velvet gloves and pat your wee had and speak in sof, reassuring tones as I told you that that what you like in this world has no bearing on the topic.

[Ed Cunard]

That maybe says more about Peter David than it does IDENTITY CRISIS.

If only someone could go back in time via cosmic treadmill, hookers in tow...

[Shellhead]

That maybe says more about Peter David than it does IDENTITY CRISIS.

Yeah, he probably doesn't to burn any bridges with DC right now.

[Shellhead]

People can certainly either enjoy or not enjoy Identity Crisis depending on their individual preference.

Objectively, however, it fails as a mystery on pretty much every level. There's lousy detective work with the phone records, there's the lack of explanation *in the story* about why Jean went to such lengths, and there's real contortions to work Jack Drake's murder into Jean's plot.

If the lousy mystery doesn't bother people who like IC, that's cool. But that doesn't make it a *good* mystery, by any stretch of the imagination. Just a bad mystery that you liked because plot doesn't matter/liked the villain banter/pick your own reason.

It does raise the question of *what* they liked about Identity Crisis, given that it was a bad murder mystery. Offhand, the only thing that really seems to set Identity Crisis apart from almost every other comic is the rape scene. The logical conclusion is that Identity Crisis was popular because lots of fans liked the rape scene. Maybe DC should become RC.

[Gaz]

Sorry- I was under the assumption that we were all adults that can deal with direct comments now and again. I didn't realize that I needed to put on velvet gloves and pat your wee had and speak in sof, reassuring tones as I told you that that what you like in this world has no bearing on the topic.
Never said you did. You can say what you want, how you want. I happen to disagree both with the content (so-called "objective quality" has no bearing on this, enjoyment does.) and the presentation.

But... have we (you and I) EVER been able to agree, or even talk about this in a manner that didn't end up with sniping and heated tempers? I can't recall it ever happening. That's a big part of why I'm wary of jumping into these debates. And I'll fully admit that I'm to blame for it too, being somewhat hypersensitive, especially when I'm angry or irritated. In fact, given that I've said almost everything I wanted to, I'm out.

[Ed Cunard]

It does raise the question of *what* they liked about Identity Crisis, given that it was a bad murder mystery. Offhand, the only thing that really seems to set Identity Crisis apart from almost every other comic is the rape scene. The logical conclusion is that Identity Crisis was popular because lots of fans liked the rape scene. Maybe DC should become RC.

See, no. There's also the darkening-of-superheroic-icons, the Actions! Have! Consequences!, the THIS WILL CHANGE THINGS 4-EVA!--looking at its popularity based entirely off of the rape scene isn't logically sound, either.

[JeffreyWKramer]

If only someone could go back in time via cosmic treadmill, hookers in tow...

Heh!

Yeah, he probably doesn't to burn any bridges with DC right now.

There's that too.

Plus, lots of people write glowing reviews, and the reviews often end up bearing no resemblance to reality. Back in the 80s, almost any crappy piece of horror fiction you picked up on the stands would have some blurb from Stephen King, in which he stated that the book was a thing of wonder, when in fact most readers wondered how the crap ever managed to get published. I never knew if King just had really crappy taste in writing, or was friends to these people, or got a kickback or what, but it taught me that celebrity endorsements mean exactly zilch.

As to PAD, who knows? Maybe he and Brad Meltzer are friends or something, or maybe he just likes crappy stuff. I have to admit, I'm not a huge fan of Peter David's writing - really, other than some of his run on HULK, most of his stuff I've read, I thought sucked - so his saying IC was well-written carries about as much weight with me as would Dick Cheney stating someone was a person of honor and integrity.

[Joe Rice]

As I mainly post on forums where most of the fans are fans of superhero comics themselves, the thing I see most is superhero fans belittling other superhero fans for reading superhero books they themselves don't like.

Excellent point.

[Dreadstar]

I've honestly given up on mainstream DC comics. They're doing their thing, they have their audience, that's fine with me. I don't give a shit anymore.

Yep. Precisely why I'm almost out of DC now.

Hell, I picked up the House of M TPB from the library last night, and was more enjoyably interested (and surprised! I'd heard it sucked) in that weird-ass story line and all it's warts and foibles than ANYTHING that's come out fo DC in a couple years, now. Well, I'll grant you AS Superman, but still.

[Ed Cunard]

Never said you did. You can say what you want, how you want. I happen to disagree both with the content (so-called "objective quality" has no bearing on this, enjoyment does.) and the presentation.

It's not "so-called"--as some of us have said before, quality and personal enjoyment are not the same thing at all. No one is obligated to like something because it is capital-G Good, nor are they required to hate something because it's big-A Awful.

But... have we (you and I) EVER been able to agree, or even talk about this in a manner that didn't end up with sniping and heated tempers? I can't recall it ever happening.

You do tend to get upset if someone else makes disparaging comments about something you like. Seriously--no one is calling you an idiot for liking something in this specific thread, which is all I have to go by at the moment.

[JeffreyWKramer]

See, no. There's also the darkening-of-superheroic-icons, the Actions! Have! Consequences!, the THIS WILL CHANGE THINGS 4-EVA!--looking at its popularity based entirely off of the rape scene isn't logically sound, either.


Right. Some people just like illogical stories about pessimistic, hypocritical superheroes that act like assholes. And Dan Didio is happy to cater to those people.

[Ed Cunard]

Right. Some people just like illogical stories about pessimistic, hypocritical superheroes that act like assholes. And Dan Didio is happy to cater to those people.

Bolded Statement #1--objective.

Bolded Statement #2--subjective and emotional.

[Michael P]

It does raise the question of *what* they liked about Identity Crisis, given that it was a bad murder mystery.
I would guess the angst. It was an angsty book. When I tried, briefly, to MST the first issue, the first thing I noticed was that the caption boxes were loaded with angst and pretentious soliloquizing. I guess the people who liked it like that sort of thing.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Yep. Precisely why I'm almost out of DC now.

Hell, I picked up the House of M TPB from the library last night, and was more enjoyably interested (and surprised! I'd heard it sucked) in that weird-ass story line and all it's warts and foibles than ANYTHING that's come out fo DC in a couple years, now.

I wasn't big on HOUSE OF M, but I think it was vastly better-written and more internally coherent than the IDENTITY CRISIS/COUNTDOWN/INFINITE CRISIS mess. This is also true of CIVIL WAR, though I have some serious problems with some of the characterization in those books (particularly in regard to Reed Richards - anyone interested can check out my rant on the current CIVIL WAR #3 thread on the CW Forum).

[Joe Rice]

Yeah, honestly, Gaz, you get really upset about this stuff really easily. You seem to think people are attacking you EVERY TIME and they're not. Alex isn't attacking you. I'm not. Ed isn't. What you like has nothing to do with what's good, and it needn't have anything to do with it either, and neither does it have any bearing on you as a person.

[Michael P]

I wasn't big on HOUSE OF M, but I think it was vastly better-written and more internally coherent than the IDENTITY CRISIS/COUNTDOWN/INFINITE CRISIS mess. This is also true of CIVIL WAR, though I have some serious problems with some of the characterization in those books (particularly in regard to Reed Richards - anyone interested can check out my rant on the current CIVIL WAR #3 thread on the CW Forum).
House of M would have been good if it were about half as long. Not great, because there's some intrinsic flaws in the structure and plot that size has no bearing on, but yards better than how it turned out.

[Ed Cunard]

I would guess the angst. It was an angsty book. When I tried, briefly, to MST the first issue, the first thing I noticed was that the caption boxes were loaded with angst and pretentious soliloquizing. I guess the people who liked it like that sort of thing.

What struck me about the first two issues was the blatant emotional manipulativeness--I mean, a lot of good work manipulates the audience emotionally, but the well-crafted stuff tends to be more subtle about it.

[Michael P]

Yeah, honestly, Gaz, you get really upset about this stuff really easily. You seem to think people are attacking you EVERY TIME and they're not. Alex isn't attacking you. I'm not. Ed isn't. What you like has nothing to do with what's good, and it needn't have anything to do with it either, and neither does it have any bearing on you as a person.
Still, "stupid" is a pretty loaded term. Wouldn't "lowbrow" say the same thing without the pejorative connotations?

[Typo Lad]

House of M's central premise - that the Scarlet Witch went insane and restructured reality, while being poorly executed, made more sense than Infinite Crisis.

Because it's unfair to comapre HoM and IC. IC should be compared to Avengers Dissasembled, as both were just set up for larger storylines.

Oh, and both required characters to act utterly out of character in order to work.

[Dreadstar]

House of M would have been good if it were about half as long. Not great, because there's some intrinsic flaws in the structure and plot that size has no bearing on, but yards better than how it turned out.

Still, even with the errors, flaws and mistakes in plot points, it was far better than the entire Crisis bullshit. When piss-poor is what you've been reading as a standard, halfway decent becomes a relative supernova.

[Joe Rice]

Still, "stupid" is a pretty loaded term. Wouldn't "lowbrow" say the same thing without the pejorative connotations?

I dunno, I feel like if someone gets upset when a superhero comic is called "stupid" they'll get upset about "lowbrow" too. Especially when the people calling them stupid FRICKIN LOVE superhero comics anyway.

[Ed Cunard]

Still, "stupid" is a pretty loaded term. Wouldn't "lowbrow" say the same thing without the pejorative connotations?

No--for many people, even lowbrow has a negative connotation.

EDIT: I'd offer Rice a Coke, but he'd probably have to check with the wifey to see if he's allowed to drink it.

[Michael P]

What struck me about the first two issues was the blatant emotional manipulativeness--I mean, a lot of good work manipulates the audience emotionally, but the well-crafted stuff tends to be more subtle about it.
Yeah, as soon as Ralph started talking about how much he loved Sue, he might as well just have shown Firehawk a picture of the new boat they were going to sail around the world.

I don't get why writers don't see why that kind of cockteasery backfires.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Still, "stupid" is a pretty loaded term. Wouldn't "lowbrow" say the same thing without the pejorative connotations?


I don't have a problem with "stupid" in this context. Saying a given work or a category of work is "stupid" isn't the same as saying people who like that stuff are stupid.

[Joe Rice]

Still, even with the errors, flaws and mistakes in plot points, it was far better than the entire Crisis bullshit. When piss-poor is what you've been reading as a standard, halfway decent becomes a relative supernova.


Too true. This is a side-topic, but I feel like a lot of the superhero books getting praise these days are actually, artistically and objectively, middle-of-the-road, no better books. But, compared to the truly awful stuff out there, they seem much better to their readers.

Similarly, Civil War, yeah, IS working on a "dumb summer action movie" groove that crossovers should and Crisis failed to do.

[Dreadstar]

Because it's unfair to comapre HoM and IC. IC should be compared to Avengers Dissasembled, as both were just set up for larger storylines.

Oh, and both required characters to act utterly out of character in order to work.

OK, very good point. Disassembled was pretty fuckin bad.

[LtMarvel]

Heh!



There's that too.

Plus, lots of people write glowing reviews, and the reviews often end up bearing no resemblance to reality. Back in the 80s, almost any crappy piece of horror fiction you picked up on the stands would have some blurb from Stephen King, in which he stated that the book was a thing of wonder, when in fact most readers wondered how the crap ever managed to get published. I never knew if King just had really crappy taste in writing, or was friends to these people, or got a kickback or what, but it taught me that celebrity endorsements mean exactly zilch.

As to PAD, who knows? Maybe he and Brad Meltzer are friends or something, or maybe he just likes crappy stuff. I have to admit, I'm not a huge fan of Peter David's writing - really, other than some of his run on HULK, most of his stuff I've read, I thought sucked - so his saying IC was well-written carries about as much weight with me as would Dick Cheney stating someone was a person of honor and integrity.
There's always the possibility that PAD is right. He is a professional writer and would have a better understanding of the craft.

[Dreadstar]

There's always the possibility that PAD is right. He is a professional writer and would have a better understanding of the craft.

Very true. But then again there's another possible reason for it, which I've observed quite honestly in the past. That of not wanting to piss off your peers, and praising them without regard to their craft so as not to make enemies within the camp you may have to some day work with. IOW, someone you might otherwise see as a hack garners praise because MAN would it be awkward if you had to do a book with them after having called them a hack in public.

[Typo Lad]

PAD may have more knowledge in the craft of writing, but well, we're all pretty experianced readers.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Too true. This is a side-topic, but I feel like a lot of the superhero books getting praise these days are actually, artistically and objectively, middle-of-the-road, no better books. But, compared to the truly awful stuff out there, they seem much better to their readers.

Similarly, Civil War, yeah, IS working on a "dumb summer action movie" groove that crossovers should and Crisis failed to do.


I tend to agree. I prefer a work to be *really good*, but I can enjoy something that's just okay, and given how few superhero comics these days - especially from DC - pass the muster as even "just okay", I'm glad to see something that is at least okay, and kind of fun. CIVIL WAR is a good example. Much as I have reservations about the concept, it's mostly competently written, the pacing isn't bad, and there are some bang-wow moments (like the ending of the current #3). We aren't talking PROMETHEA or THE SPIRIT here. We're more talking "average old-school JLA/JSA team-up"... but that's still vastly better than current books like, say, TEEN TITANS.

[Kid Omega]

Never said you did. You can say what you want, how you want. I happen to disagree both with the content (so-called "objective quality" has no bearing on this, enjoyment does.) and the presentation.

But... have we (you and I) EVER been able to agree, or even talk about this in a manner that didn't end up with sniping and heated tempers? I can't recall it ever happening. That's a big part of why I'm wary of jumping into these debates. And I'll fully admit that I'm to blame for it too, being somewhat hypersensitive, especially when I'm angry or irritated. In fact, given that I've said almost everything I wanted to, I'm out.

A couple of things...
First, you want everyone to baby you. I could probably be less of a dick about things, but I have little patience sometimes. I'm not trying to be an asshole, just succinct. You can't expect everyone to pet your head when they think you're wrong.

Secondly, you take shit WAY too personally. If we're having a conversation about what objectively is wrong with certain superhero books, saying "BUT I LIKE SUPERHERO BOOKS AND YOU GUYS ARE SNOBS!!!" isn't proving any points.

[Typo Lad]

Yeah, CIVIL WAR is better than I expected. Parts feel forced, but it's nothing like the scores of INFINITE CRISIS STARTS HERE! minis.

"Dumb summer movie" is a good feel. It wokrds if you don't think about it too much. Unlike INFINITE CRISIS, which was more like a SCI-FI channel original movie.

[Ed Cunard]

He is a professional writer and would have a better understanding of the craft.

Now that, I really hate, as it effectively neuters critics and critical thought. Criticism itself is an artform, if a slightly parasitic one.

[JeffreyWKramer]

There's always the possibility that PAD is right. He is a professional writer and would have a better understanding of the craft.


There's also the possibility I might start shitting out emeralds, but I wouldn't bet on it.

Keep in mind, not all professional writers are actually any good. Dan Brown is a professional writer, too, and THE DA VINCI CODE is maybe even more stupid than is IDENTITY CRISIS (though less so than INFINITE CRISIS).

[Typo Lad]

Now that, I really hate, as it effectively neuters critics and critical thought. Criticism itself is an artform, if a slightly parasitic one.
slightly?

C'mon man, Critics are symbiotic at best, but certainly are not self-sustaining organisms.

[Kid Omega]

I don't have a problem with "stupid" in this context. Saying a given work or a category of work is "stupid" isn't the same as saying people who like that stuff are stupid.

I love many superhero books.

But they are stupid. One should be able to make that distinction if one wants to discuss them.

I love Pizza Hut, but it ain't fresh baked neapolitan with kneaded mozzarella.... it's garbage.

The fact that I think it tastes good means nothing... except that I like crappy pizza.

[Ed Cunard]

slightly?

C'mon man, Critics are symbiotic at best, but certainly are not self-sustaining organisms.

Bulls and pooping. Nothing creative is a self-sustaining organism. Really, critics don't even need new work to analyze critically--production on all forms of art and entertainment could stop today, and there's enough of a backlog of stuff that is open for exploration.

Symbiotic, though, I'll agree.

[Kid Omega]

There's always the possibility that PAD is right. He is a professional writer and would have a better understanding of the craft.

Yeah, "Sir Apropos of Nothing" is one hell of a novel.

He's right up there with other writer/critics like TS Eliot, James Agee, and Dorothy Parker. Except even better, because he goes to Renn Fairs.

[Michael P]

Too true. This is a side-topic, but I feel like a lot of the superhero books getting praise these days are actually, artistically and objectively, middle-of-the-road, no better books. But, compared to the truly awful stuff out there, they seem much better to their readers.

I dunno about that. I think the good-but-not-great superhero books (I'll use Ed Brubaker's start on Uncanny X-Men as an example; not breathtaking, but solid, enjoyable stuff) are emasurably better than the stunningly awful ones, even if they're not the Pinnacle of the Genre, and I think it's worth saying so. Not being wheat doesn't make it chaff.

Then again, I'm very generous with my praise and enjoyment. I have an infinite supply of both.

Similarly, Civil War, yeah, IS working on a "dumb summer action movie" groove that crossovers should and Crisis failed to do.
I guess this is a good enough place to say that I liked some of the Annual crossovers Marvel used to do. Not the big ones, but the little, three- or four-book ones. They had that action movie feel, and also weren't pretentious about reflecting serious issues on the condition of our times.

Which leads me to my point: I blame al Quaeda for shitty superhero comics. If they hadn't knocked down the towers, Marvel and DC wouldn't be so damn insecure.

[JeffreyWKramer]

There's always the possibility that PAD is right. He is a professional writer and would have a better understanding of the craft.

Another criticism of this rather inane argument...

Although I've never written comics, technically *I'm* also a professional writer. I'm paid to write things all the time - ranging from policy and procedures documents to court reports - and I've also written articles and book chapters which have been printed in professional journals and reference works. So, does that mean I'm automatically correct as to what constitutes good writing?

I'm pretty sure lots of people who post at CBR get paid for writing things from time to time. Pho is one, for sure. Does that mean we're all likely candidates for the Pulitzer, or ultimate arbitrers of quality?

Hasn't Rob Liefeld written some of his books? That makes him a professional writer. Sure, PAD is closer to being an actual, good writer than is Liefeld, but PAD and Liefeld are a lot closer to each other than either is to Faulkner.

[Typo Lad]

Critics are creative?

Fascinating.

[Tom]

What struck me about the first two issues was the blatant emotional manipulativeness--I mean, a lot of good work manipulates the audience emotionally, but the well-crafted stuff tends to be more subtle about it.
Rags Morales giving everyone in the DCU (including the Asian characters) giant Crying Clown Eyes didn't help.

[Michael P]

Yeah, "Sir Apropos of Nothing" is one hell of a novel.

He's right up there with other writer/critics like TS Eliot, James Agee, and Dorothy Parker. Except even better, because he goes to Renn Fairs.
Point taken, but have you read it? It's actually pretty darn good. It didn't change my life or anything, but I'm glad I read it.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Critics are creative?

Fascinating.

Sometimes, yes. A four-line brush-off of the most current Ben Stiller movie is unlikely to be a work of art, but on the other end of the spectrum, you