How bad was pre-Crisis, 1980s DC?

[SUPERECWFAN1]

You have any details on that editor challenge? Sounds interesting. I just remember that as of Titans Hunt, (a) the book had "buzz" again, and (b) it was well-deserved, as the stories were actually interesting again.

Oh yeah the editor (name escapes me) had came on and from old articles and interviews I read he came from Marvel during the "new blood" phase and got promoted to his 1st real editor job. He wanted to really make a splash and wanted to make the Titans be a franchise again . So here was what I remember he detailed...

1.) Wolfman told him he really didn't think he had anymore stories to tell with the Titans. The guy told Marv to think of the craziest ideas he could imagine and mentioned the Wildebeasts as rogues he liked. Wolfman and him conceived that arc with them as the main rogues.

2.) Spin-off books. Deathstroke was the popular character and he asked Wolfman why he never let him be in Titans as much. Wolfman never really seemed to give it that thought the popular rogue could work in a series. As the editor claimed , he pictured Slade Wilson as their "Wolverine" type character and wanted him to get the 1st big spin-off series. DC told them to judge reaction from Titans #70 to see how it work. Once reaction was good enough , Deathstroke got his own series.

3.) Another spin-off was Team Titans. Which would come outta the Total Chaos arc. This one happened.

4.) Before the editor left , another spin-off series was gonna be called The Hybrid (I believe that was the name). It was supposed to be in the 3rd big arc leading to #100. But he left and the plans seemed to go to shit as the Batman editors pulled Nightwing from Wolfman and Zero Hour was around the corner.

[An Ear In The Fireplace]

I conceded New Teen Titans and Swamp Thing within the original question.

Beyond that, I think you missed the prepositional phrase: "in the 'core' DC universe." That knocks out Camelot 3000, Night Force, Arak, Nathaniel Dusk, Ronin, and Atari Force. The Crisis wasn't addressed to those titles, so they weren't really the point of my question.

Re. the Superman double-villain revamp--Luthor's new armor and the robotic Brainiac--though there may have been a small "bump," I'm not convinced there was any lasting effect on the sales (or quality) of Action or Superman.

I agree with you on Batman and Legion of Super-Heroes. All-Star Squadron did well enough to have spinoffs and is well-remembered on this board, so I'll concede that point, too.

The thing is I think that's an unfair limitation. DC has had times when their super-hero books were really great, but they have had many times when their other genre books were doing better. You're trying to make an argument that somehow DC wasn't up to scratch, but then all these new things they were doing are taken off the table, because they don't fit the traditional super-hero category.

I thought Thriller was one of the most innovative titles that they were doing, but it failed. Why? Because the market wasn't there for it. Five years later it probably would have done a lot better. Even though DC didn't have a success with that title, it shows that DC was trying to do really interesting quality things.

But even when you take those innovative books off the table, and just look at the super-hero stuff, I would still say they were doing very well. Although it depends on how you define success. I suppose every DC book I could name would be judged a failure because it either didn't sell well in comic shops (as opposed to newsstands) or it didn't meet one person's criteria of quality or some other general purpose reason.

[destro]

I didn't read too much SUPERMAN or ACTION COMICS during the early 1980s, but I think the *character* was just fine when I read him in DC COMICS PRESENTS and JUSTICE LEAGUE OF AMERICA.

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

He was just fine in those books perhaps. Especially in DCCP, which like Brave and the Bold and on the other side Marvel Team Up were often much more entertaining than the character's core titles. Try picking up some Superman/Actions from that time period though and you'll see the problem.

[An Ear In The Fireplace]

Like I say, in the early 80s with travelling around there were times when I couldn't get all the comics I wanted, so my Superman/Action collection is patchy in spots from those years. But I think this will be my next project, to fill in all those issues, so I don't want to praise these comics too highly, for fear the price for back issues will go up.

Therefore, I will calculate my words to leave the worst impression of these comics, to keep the prices down--at least until I've managed to fill in my runs, at which point I may sing their praises.

At this time, I will not say that the Superman title held to a consistent standard of quality throughout this period. From 1980 to 1983, on the Superman title I believe most of the stories were by Cary Bates--I should not say that he continued to produce the same entertainment he had provided in the 60s and 70s. Artwork was by Curt Swan and Gil Kane--let's not think too highly of these overrated gentlemen. From 1984 to 1986, there was a hodge podge of writers and Al Williamson was inking Swan--but again I will keep mum about the epic quality of these comics.

On the Action title it broke down in a similar way. From 1980 to 1983, Marv Wolfman delivered stories that could continue from one issue to another or cross over with other events around the DC universe. With Gil Kane often handling the art, one might think these are the kind of comics that fanboys love, but I encourage everyone to retain their hatred for them. It was all trash and not worth your time, I say.

The issues of Action Comics from 1984 to 1986 are what I think most of the fanboys belly ache about. And they should continue to think this way. In these comics there were some of the usual writers and artists associated with the title from the previous decades, but there were also many guest writers and artists. With two or three stories jammed into each issue, this was often light fair (even Ambush Bug would show up to engage in frivolity). And, of course, collectors should believe that such silliness reminiscent of Jimmy Olsen comics from the 1950s is not worth their time. They should stay far away from these. Nothing to see here. Nope. Do not fall in love with the sense of joy and fantasy in every issue. I support the belief that the best was yet to come when John Byrne took over the title. So you can rest easy with those prejudices and never bother with any of this ridiculous stuff.

(I think my little trick has worked--hee hee.)

I believe the reason for the shift in Superman and Action in 1984 was that the writing was on the wall for the Man of Steel. There was no point in Schwartz trying to build up anything with Superman, because he had no mandate to do so. So he seems to have thrown open the doors and let everyone into the room to have a crack at creating the classic Superman before that Man of Tomorrow was no more. Thus the often freewheeling nature of the titles, especially Action.

Of course, nobody should be curious about these comics and they deserve to remain unexamined. Complete and utter garbage.

[dupersuper]

He was just fine in those books perhaps. Especially in DCCP, which like Brave and the Bold and on the other side Marvel Team Up were often much more entertaining than the character's core titles. Try picking up some Superman/Actions from that time period though and you'll see the problem.

I like the Wolfman Action issues I've read from the early-mid 80s...

[Buried Alien]

He was just fine in those books perhaps. Especially in DCCP, which like Brave and the Bold and on the other side Marvel Team Up were often much more entertaining than the character's core titles. Try picking up some Superman/Actions from that time period though and you'll see the problem.

Come to think of it, ALL of the Superman I read during the early 1980s was him as a featured character in a team, team-up, or guest-starring in somebody else's book (but Supes was always great in those books). I didn't read a single Pre-COIE SUPERMAN or ACTION COMICS issue during the first half of the 1980s (did read a few late 1970s ACTION/SUPERMAN books, but I was barely out of the first grade when the 1970s ended).

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[destro]

Like I say, in the early 80s with travelling around there were times when I couldn't get all the comics I wanted, so my Superman/Action collection is patchy in spots from those years. But I think this will be my next project, to fill in all those issues, so I don't want to praise these comics too highly, for fear the price for back issues will go up.

Therefore, I will calculate my words to leave the worst impression of these comics, to keep the prices down--at least until I've managed to fill in my runs, at which point I may sing their praises.

At this time, I will not say that the Superman title held to a consistent standard of quality throughout this period. From 1980 to 1983, on the Superman title I believe most of the stories were by Cary Bates--I should not say that he continued to produce the same entertainment he had provided in the 60s and 70s. Artwork was by Curt Swan and Gil Kane--let's not think too highly of these overrated gentlemen. From 1984 to 1986, there was a hodge podge of writers and Al Williamson was inking Swan--but again I will keep mum about the epic quality of these comics.

On the Action title it broke down in a similar way. From 1980 to 1983, Marv Wolfman delivered stories that could continue from one issue to another or cross over with other events around the DC universe. With Gil Kane often handling the art, one might think these are the kind of comics that fanboys love, but I encourage everyone to retain their hatred for them. It was all trash and not worth your time, I say.

The issues of Action Comics from 1984 to 1986 are what I think most of the fanboys belly ache about. And they should continue to think this way. In these comics there were some of the usual writers and artists associated with the title from the previous decades, but there were also many guest writers and artists. With two or three stories jammed into each issue, this was often light fair (even Ambush Bug would show up to engage in frivolity). And, of course, collectors should believe that such silliness reminiscent of Jimmy Olsen comics from the 1950s is not worth their time. They should stay far away from these. Nothing to see here. Nope. Do not fall in love with the sense of joy and fantasy in every issue. I support the belief that the best was yet to come when John Byrne took over the title. So you can rest easy with those prejudices and never bother with any of this ridiculous stuff.

(I think my little trick has worked--hee hee.)

I believe the reason for the shift in Superman and Action in 1984 was that the writing was on the wall for the Man of Steel. There was no point in Schwartz trying to build up anything with Superman, because he had no mandate to do so. So he seems to have thrown open the doors and let everyone into the room to have a crack at creating the classic Superman before that Man of Tomorrow was no more. Thus the often freewheeling nature of the titles, especially Action.

Of course, nobody should be curious about these comics and they deserve to remain unexamined. Complete and utter garbage.

I certainly never dismissed all of these titles as garbage. And everyone who disagrees with you is not a fanboy. Is that really necessary?

There is a lot a don't like about this time at DC, but I've already said that I enjoy parts of it as well. I just don't happen to enjoy anything involving Cary Bates, and yes I do consider Superman and Action in the 70s and early 80s to have the worst writing ever done on the character. Same goes for Bates Flash work. I hate it. That doesn't mean it's trash, it's just weak stuff to me and not to my taste. It has none of the charm of Silver Age DC and none of the interesting modern takes either. It's just bleh to me. That's just opinion, I get that you love them and that's cool too.

I respect your opinion on it, wish you could do the same for me and other who don't share your viewpoints. I own a lot of these comics because they are so cheap to get, so I'm not just generalizing. I've read the stuff and I think it's lame. You are going to find a lot of people who agree with me, and DC apparently did as well since they rebooted the entire concept of Superman after years of Cary Bates unsuccessful take on the character failed to work.

[An Ear In The Fireplace]

I think you got me all wrong, but that just might work in my favour.

[destro]

I think you got me all wrong, but that just might work in my favour.

Well would you explain? I'm really not trying to start some big argument, just trying to say I have different tastes on it, and I kind of felt you were dismissing people with different opinions on these books as fanboys. If I got you wrong, I'm sorry.

By the way, just to show that I'm not a total Bates-Basher I do think he did some nice work on Gargoyles. And he's probably a really swell guy. I just really dislike his Flash/Superman work.

[An Ear In The Fireplace]

Well, if you have to explain a joke then it's not funny. So I guess my comic timing is off.

[destro]

Well, if you have to explain a joke then it's not funny. So I guess my comic timing is off.

I am terminally afflicted with "not always being able to tell when people are joking" disease, it's cool.

I wish I was a fan of that era, because there is so darned much of it.

And just to try and go out on a positive note, I LOVE Brave and the Bold and DC Comics Presents! Even for people like me who don't care much for that time at DC there is still a lot to like.

[Mace Dolex]

This is an awesome thread, for me I actually started collecting DC in 1987 after Crisis but I did read a few pre-Crisis early 80's Batman and Superman via reprints.

The Gerry Conway/Don Newton/Gene Colan Batman stories from this time period are my absolute favorite that to me at least I thought all DC comics were like this, but picking up a few Superman pre-Crisis comics and from the presentation to the art it just seemed dreadful and a shame too because the comic covers from the 80's always seemed to hook the reader that when you actually opened the comic it was just sad.