Why people hate most modern books 3 3

[Ken Aldred]

59 minutes ago, jjonahjameson11 said:

Female Thor.... Really?  Who needs this .

 

Jason Aaron's run with Jane Foster as Thor was actually quite good.

 

[kav]

37 minutes ago, RCheli said:

It doesn't seem to be true because it isn't true. He doesn't like modern books and others here don't like them, so in his mind that means everyone hates them.

Um reading is fundamental-you should try it sometime.  I never said 'everyone' I very clearly stated "now we're in the modern age and people generally find them despicable.  Sure there are exceptions but what's the reason for the general distaste?" 

[RCheli]

1 minute ago, kav said:

Um reading is fundamental-you should try it sometime.  I never said 'everyone' I very clearly stated "now we're in the modern age and people generally find them despicable.  Sure there are exceptions but what's the reason for the general distaste?" 

Sorry, I overestimated your simplemindedness. It seems that you think that the majority of people find them despicable, and that is also not true.

This is just yet another example -- as was the previous one where you complained about the bad Batgirl art -- where you make some ridiculous pronouncement about something without anything to back it up. Obviously you have a problem with modern comics. 

[Cliff R.]

I don't buy modern books, I have no interest in seeing

Batman's : Batman exposed

Jesus' Second Coming : DC comics 2nd coming

And countless others.  I wouldn't collect this trash if it were free.

 

[kav]

1 minute ago, RCheli said:

  the majority of people find them despicable, and that is also not true.

 

Prove that statement or go away.  

I'll state as my evidence the low readership numbers of modern books.  

As far as the Batgirl art, I had plenty to back it up, a shower rod hanging in mid air, a bathtub in front of a door, the changing size of the mirror-

 

[kav]

2 minutes ago, Cliff R. said:

I don't buy modern books, I have no interest in seeing

Batman's : Batman exposed

Jesus' Second Coming : DC comics 2nd coming

And countless others.  I wouldn't collect this trash if it were free.

 

Countless others have expressed similar views, but according to Cheli, you don't exist.   

[october]

People who think modern comics are bad need to look past the junk being put out by the big two.

There's plenty of good titles that don't involve men in tights.

[kav]

2 minutes ago, october said:

People who think modern comics are bad need to look past the junk being put out by the big two.

There's plenty of good titles that don't involve men in tights.

Yep as I said there are exception for sure.  Brubaker and Phillips for one.  Sophie Campbell for another.

Edited February 2, 2019 by kav

[1950's war comics]

modern comic are a rip off , i have tried but they are completely unreadable ,.. i picked up a new issue of the walking dead a couple years ago because i liked the show and there wasn't a single zombie in the comic .. it did have Jesus and a tiger though  ... 

other moderns have nice covers so i thumb through them to see if they are interesting enough to buy and i always see two page splash pages with zero dialogue .. the art isn't good on these two page splash pages , i think i could draw as good as some of it ... and i can't draw ....

don't even get the average person started on the re-boot one armed homosexual midget Daredevil ... that was the final straw for an entire generation of comic book buyers

[RCheli]

14 minutes ago, kav said:

Prove that statement or go away.  

I'll state as my evidence the low readership numbers of modern books.  

As far as the Batgirl art, I had plenty to back it up, a shower rod hanging in mid air, a bathtub in front of a door, the changing size of the mirror-

 

Low readership does not equal quality, and the fact that you're using that as evidence means that this is an argument I've already won. Television shows have lost ridiculous numbers of viewers over the past several decades, but there are still great (and awful shows) being broadcast. The same goes for album sales.

Look, it's difficult to argue with you because of your narrow focus. But these boards -- as great as they are -- are not the place to go if you're looking to find fans of modern comics. It's like going to a Bernie Sanders rally looking for people who want to keep pot illegal. That doesn't mean there aren't plenty of people out there who think that way.

I have read every iteration of Mr. Miracle -- from Kirby to Englehart/Rogers to JM DeMatties to many others -- and the most recent series was the best (IMO). The current Hawkman series is terrific, and I've enjoyed that more than anything else I've read of the character. And I suspect that each of those titles have sold fewer than at any previous time. There are tons of great comics coming out now, and I would put the best of what's being published today against the best of any era (although the way comics are published today doesn't really resemble the way they were in the past; though the way they were published in the 70s doesn't much resemble how they were published in the 40s). 

[RCheli]

19 minutes ago, october said:

People who think modern comics are bad need to look past the junk being put out by the big two.

There's plenty of good titles that don't involve men in tights.

I agree, and non-hero books from the beginning of comics were often the best stuff being published. But there are good super-hero comics, too.

[kav]

Just now, RCheli said:

Low readership does not equal quality, and the fact that you're using that as evidence means that this is an argument I've already won. Television shows have lost ridiculous numbers of viewers over the past several decades, but there are still great (and awful shows) being broadcast. The same goes for album sales.

Look, it's difficult to argue with you because of your narrow focus. But these boards -- as great as they are -- are not the place to go if you're looking to find fans of modern comics. It's like going to a Bernie Sanders rally looking for people who want to keep pot illegal. That doesn't mean there aren't plenty of people out there who think that way.

I have read every iteration of Mr. Miracle -- from Kirby to Englehart/Rogers to JM DeMatties to many others -- and the most recent series was the best (IMO). The current Hawkman series is terrific, and I've enjoyed that more than anything else I've read of the character. And I suspect that each of those titles have sold fewer than at any previous time. There are tons of great comics coming out now, and I would put the best of what's being published today against the best of any era (although the way comics are published today doesn't really resemble the way they were in the past; though the way they were published in the 70s doesn't much resemble how they were published in the 40s). 

Ok that's a cogent, reasonable argument.  And I started this thread to open a dialogue I wasnt trying to claim 100% that most or all people hate modern books.  I just noticed over the years a lot of criticism of them.  And I thought that's never happened before where a comics era was despised.  If it is.

[RCheli]

3 minutes ago, kav said:

Ok that's a cogent, reasonable argument.  And I started this thread to open a dialogue I wasnt trying to claim 100% that most or all people hate modern books.  I just noticed over the years a lot of criticism of them.  And I thought that's never happened before where a comics era was despised.  If it is.

And my original argument stands, which was:

At really no other time has readership/fandom of comics stuck with the medium for so long. If you read comics as a 12-year-old in 1950, there was a really big chance you weren't reading them in 1960. This stayed true really up until the 90s. Comic collecting was for a small core something that they kept with, but for the majority, it was a passing fancy. Since the 90s, that number has reversed itself. 

Now the majority of people who are still in fandom have been in it for more than 20 years, and a periodical/episodic medium like comics wasn't really meant for that. They were meant to have its readership change every so often. Not many readers in 1985 were lamenting that Reed Richards was different than he was in 1965. Today, we are complaining about that. (And that is often why comics not from the Big 2, whose characters/titles don't have decades of baggage, are more appealing.)

We all tend to enjoy the comics the most from the period when we started reading them. That is really far away for most of us.

But if you go to a convention, there are a lot of people who love modern comics. If you go to a store, there are a lot of people who love modern comics. If you come to the CGC boards, there aren't that many people who love modern comics.

[SuperBird]

2 reasons for me:

• The combination of price per issue / time to read an issue is pretty ridiculous, with a $4 book taking 5 minutes to read.
• They make it too hard to collect, with all the variants and #1 reboots. 

[Lazyboy]

2 hours ago, Artboy99 said:

5. Superman, Supergirl, Superdog, Supergrandma, SuperTransvestite. Why cant we have originality!

Those are all Silver Age, with the possible exception of SuperTransvestite, so that point is moot.

The claim is that "people" didn't hate SA comics when they were new, but "people" do hate "most" current comics.

[DeadOne]

The Modern Age of Comics is pretty huge, but if I was pressed, I would say that I enjoy modern comics from the first few years of either the first, second or third decade of modern comics more so than the last few years of those decades.

[RockMyAmadeus]

10 minutes ago, RCheli said:

And my original argument stands, which was:

At really no other time has readership/fandom of comics stuck with the medium for so long. If you read comics as a 12-year-old in 1950, there was a really big chance you weren't reading them in 1960. This stayed true really up until the 90s.

This was so true that editors like Julius Schwartz noted it in the 50s, when re-creating the super hero genre. He and others, like Roy Thomas, made mention of the fact that some readers were puzzled when Flash #105 came out....a mere 10 years after Flash #104....and wondered how they had missed those previous issues, and where they could be obtained. 

Most people reading Fantastic Four #1 had no idea that, only 7 years earlier, another Human Torch was making his last "golden age" appearances in Young Men.

Think about that...10 years ago, what was radically different on the comics market...? And how many people involved in comics 10 years ago are no longer involved now, outside of those who have died?

And yet, in prior decades, you had almost a completely new audience for comics every 5 years. Very, very few people who read comics actively in 1961 were still reading them in 1967...which is why what Stan and Co. were doing at Marvel was so groundbreaking: continuity in comics was unheard of, something that they essentially created, and which had never existed in comics before.

[Lazyboy]

30 minutes ago, kav said:

And I thought that's never happened before where a comics era was despised.

[Cliff R.]

17 minutes ago, DeadOne said:

The Modern Age of Comics is pretty huge, but if I was pressed, I would say that I enjoy modern comics from the first few years of either the first, second or third decade of modern comics more so than the last few years of those decades.

Unfortunately, the modern age has lasted nearly twice as long as the others and isn't worthy of an elemental name. 

Maybe Sulphur. It stinks.

[Artboy99]

22 minutes ago, Lazyboy said:

Those are all Silver Age, with the possible exception of SuperTransvestite, so that point is moot.

The claim is that "people" didn't hate SA comics when they were new, but "people" do hate "most" current comics.

well the point is that it is still happening even in current comics.