Why people hate most modern books 3 3

[500Club]

8 hours ago, Lazyboy said:

10 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.

I don’t think it’s ever been taken to the extreme that it has in the last ten years, though.  Hulk derivatives, Spider-Man derivatives, symbiotes out the wazoo, characters with claws and healing factors, amalgamated characters... please, lord, just let it stop.

[500Club]

3 hours ago, Chuck Gower said:

Quote

2. Changes of characters to satisfy social justice warriors. Keep characters the same, I don't want to see a popular character in a new version. Invent a new character instead of ruining the old guard thanks.

 

None of these changes were made to satisfy what you call 'social justice warriors'. Marvel and DC are doing what they've ALWAYS done. Rehash the same old ideas and shake things up by changing characters temporarily.

You think it was an accident that there was a black woman, a Canadian, a Native American (and others) on Giant Sized X-Men #1? Of course not. They were trying to diversify. You think when Stan Lee and Jack Kirby created the Black Panther, it was just on whim? NO. They were trying to make a SOCIAL statement. Were they SJW's? What is the difference between then and now?

They invented new characters, as Artboy99 suggested.

[october]

4 hours ago, NoMan said:

 

EDIT: I am looking forward to Seth’s completed Cyde’s Fans coming out this May. Slipcase and all.  20 years the making.  I was living in Chicago in early  2000s and he had just started the story.  

I love me some Clyde Fans. Seth isn't for everybody, but he easily makes my personal top 10.

[Lazyboy]

25 minutes ago, 500Club said:

I don’t think it’s ever been taken to the extreme that it has in the last ten years, though.  Hulk derivatives, Spider-Man derivatives, symbiotes out the wazoo, characters with claws and healing factors, amalgamated characters... please, lord, just let it stop.

That's true, but what do you expect? Creators have seen older creators get nothing for creating multi-million dollar characters that led to multi-billion dollar corporate acquisitions and see no reason to give away their best ideas for a pittance when they can just modify the toys that are already in the playground.

[Logan510]

28 minutes ago, Lazyboy said:

That's true, but what do you expect? Creators have seen older creators get nothing for creating multi-million dollar characters that led to multi-billion dollar corporate acquisitions and see no reason to give away their best ideas for a pittance when they can just modify the toys that are already in the playground.

For every Spider-Man there's 1000 Trencher's. As someone noted at the time Steve Gerber was suing Marvel over Howard the Duck, he didn't sue for Omega the Unknown.

[UnboxingTreasures]

I’m not a fan of art produced on computer. Especially digital coloring. And of course that would only apply to moderns. 

Edited February 4, 2019 by NamesJay

[Prince Namor]

3 hours ago, Lazyboy said:

That's true, but what do you expect? Creators have seen older creators get nothing for creating multi-million dollar characters that led to multi-billion dollar corporate acquisitions and see no reason to give away their best ideas for a pittance when they can just modify the toys that are already in the playground.

Exactly. And this is the main difference. Why create something for Marvel and DC when they're simply going to take that idea for themselves and possibly make millions off of it in merchandising rights, when you can possibly do it yourself.

And it's not just THAT... those creators also control how and when those characters ARE presented and what happens to them. It's THEIR character to decide, and they're not helpless to watch a publisher do what THEY want with it. It's also about creative control. 

[Ken Aldred]

9 hours ago, Jaylam said:

Gee, comics lost me with the ridiculous Spider-Man and Gwen clones/Jackal garbage back in 1975.

Surprising, looking back, that such a small amount of Bronze Age material from Gerry Conway generated month after month after month of tedious, poorly-conceived drivel in the mid 1990s.

[Prince Namor]

4 hours ago, Artboy99 said:

Again while the examples I mention are silver age or fabricated the point I am making remains, they still do this. Red Hulk, Grey Hulk, She-Hulk, Red She-hulk, son of Hulk, daughter of Hulk, Hulk Wolverine combined, Son of Wolverine, Female Wolverine... need I go on?

It's the same thing they've always done, they've just ramped it up more. If when they created She-Hulk and it was successful for a short period of time (i.e. sold), and they made the Hulk Grey and called him Mr. Fix-it and it sold for a short period of time... why wouldn't they continue this idea? People buy it... No is buying comics like they were 50 years ago, and when they DO this, sales initially go up. 

Make no mistake: When Marvel creates a female version of the Iron Man character, slaps a #1 issue on it, and create multiple variants for it - the initial orders for it jump 2-5X what they were when it was plain old Tony Stark. Eventually, in a pretty short time, 2-3 months, those direct sales numbers come right back down to where they were. But Marvel BENEFITS by having an issue that sells as well as THAT one did. 

They do this over and over and over.

Mainstream comic book fans and Retailers deserve ALL of this. Because they keep buying it. Why WOULDN'T Marvel continue to do this?

Fans have dictated to Marvel and DC what it is they want by what they buy. And Marvel is simply acting on it.

[Ken Aldred]

12 hours ago, jsilverjanet said:

People get old, their ideas get old and anything that isn't familiar or similiar is despised.

A generalisation.  Even though I'm in my fifties, I'm still interested in the challenge of finding something different and unfamiliar in new comics.

Sometimes I like the interpretation, sometimes it fails for me, but I've experienced the same subjectivity and variability in older material, nor would I say I've found diminishing returns in moving from one Age to another.

Edited February 3, 2019 by Ken Aldred

[Prince Namor]

3 minutes ago, Ken Aldred said:

A generalisation.  Even though I'm in my fifties, I still prefer to try something different and unfamiliar in new comics.

Sometimes I like the interpretation, sometimes it fails for me, but I've experienced the same subjectivity and variability in older material.

 

Same here. Spider Gwen doesn't bother me, I think it's an interesting concept, and I actually was thrilled to see the character in the Animated Into the Spider-Verse movie. Jane Foster becoming Thor (in a slow timed reveal) was actually well done and I even liked the idea Riri Williams as Iron Heart. 

Comics as a monthly medium can get old in their story telling. Tony Stark's Iron Man as a character has appeared in (guesstimated) no less than 1000 individual comic book stories over his existence - even with multiple creators, it's tough to keep that fresh.

 

[Prince Namor]

4 hours ago, 500Club said:

They invented new characters, as Artboy99 suggested.

They did? I thought after Kirby left, Marvel just continued to regurgitate his ideas. That's what I saw.

Some created variations of old ones. For every Ultron he created (which isn't all that original) Roy Thomas throughout the Silver Age took old Golden Age heroes and reintroduced/reimagined them into his stories as well as taking characters like Frankenstein and vampires and reimagining them - while bringing back the occasional return villain.

For every Wolverine that was created at Marvel during the Bronze and Copper Age, there are plenty of She Hulks, and Monica Rambaux as Captain Marvel, and War Machine's to go around.

[Prince Namor]

3 hours ago, NamesJay said:

I’m not a fan or art produced on computer. Especially digital coloring. And of course that would only apply to moderns. 

I think THIS, more than anything else is what is the big disconnect is between old and new readers. 

I think the stories are just as insipid, one dimensional and silly as they ever were, but man, I'll take a (back in the day) Romita Sr. page over anything that exists today in most mainstream comics.

[mrc]

8 minutes ago, Chuck Gower said:

I think THIS, more than anything else is what is the big disconnect is between old and new readers. 

I think the stories are just as insipid, one dimensional and silly as they ever were, but man, I'll take a (back in the day) Romita Sr. page over anything that exists today in most mainstream comics.

............together with the cost of modern books. I simply cannot justify picking up a bunch of books (and their variants) on a whim. And no, I will never pay to look at a digital book online.  

[Prince Namor]

13 minutes ago, mrc said:

............together with the cost of modern books. I simply cannot justify picking up a bunch of books (and their variants) on a whim. And no, I will never pay to look at a digital book online.  

Yeah I'd agree, the cost is most likely a huge factor too...

As far as digital... I travel a lot so I love having a huge collection of comics available to me anywhere I am...

[mrc]

6 minutes ago, Chuck Gower said:

Yeah I'd agree, the cost is most likely a huge factor too...

As far as digital... I travel a lot so I love having a huge collection of comics available to me anywhere I am...

I accept that there's a lot of convenience in the digital world. It's just a personal thing with me.

[Prince Namor]

4 hours ago, Logan510 said:

For every Spider-Man there's 1000 Trencher's. As someone noted at the time Steve Gerber was suing Marvel over Howard the Duck, he didn't sue for Omega the Unknown.

According to Gerber, he and Marvel did "manage to reach an accommodation about that character (Omega the Unknown) and a couple of others. In the end, they were very reasonable about it, and I consider the matter closed."

[jsilverjanet]

2 hours ago, Ken Aldred said:

A generalisation.  Even though I'm in my fifties, I'm still interested in the challenge of finding something different and unfamiliar in new comics.

Sometimes I like the interpretation, sometimes it fails for me, but I've experienced the same subjectivity and variability in older material, nor would I say I've found diminishing returns in moving from one Age to another.

A generalization yes I agree but you’d also agree that you are more the exception than the rule. Plus 50 is young. I’m talking about the old farts 60 and older here 

[Artboy99]

11 hours ago, Chuck Gower said:

 

None of these changes were made to satisfy what you call 'social justice warriors'. Marvel and DC are doing what they've ALWAYS done. Rehash the same old ideas and shake things up by changing characters temporarily.

You think it was an accident that there was a black woman, a Canadian, a Native American (and others) on Giant Sized X-Men #1? Of course not. They were trying to diversify. You think when Stan Lee and Jack Kirby created the Black Panther, it was just on whim? NO. They were trying to make a SOCIAL statement. Were they SJW's? What is the difference between then and now?

Jon Stewart becomes Green Lantern, Thor becomes a frog, Spider-man grows extra arms... what's the difference between that and the Falcon becoming Captain America for a while, Jane Foster becoming Thor for a while or Wolverine dying for a while? None of these characters changed for EVER. They were story lines.

Who exactly is it they changed for SJW’s? Anyone that mattered? Golden Age Green Lantern? As if anyone was reading about him anyway. That was the only way left to make someone actually pick up the comic, because no one was reading it in the first place. And it wasn’t even the Earth 1 Golden Age Green Lantern, it was the Earth 2 version!

The whole point is to shake things up so that people BUY the comics and don’t realize that they’ve been regurgitating the same stories over and over and over again since Lee/Kirby and Ditko first created them.

Spider Gwen is no different than all the characters created LONG before the Modern Age - SuperGirl, SuperBoy. Batgirl, Batwoman, SheHulk, SpiderWoman, WonderGirl, AquaGirl.. it’s not a MODERN thing, comics has always done this.

None of this is new and different and done to appease SJW's... it's the same old stuff Marvel and DC has always done.

 

 

Go read some of the comics from last year and you may find it isn't the same old stuff. Let's use SheHulk as an example.

She-Hulk is watching a live stream about a gay man baking a cake. The filmers of the video poison the chef in an effort to increase the views of the stream to further their own careers and a strange green monster is created which gets SheHulk into "action". I quote action because it takes the writer 2 entire books before SheHulk finally does something and all she did was jump off a building. You have to go into book 3 to actually see SheHulk fight the creature.

These modern stories seem to be about race, genders and social comments on issues in the world. In the case of the books I describe above the comment is about the popularity of a gay man's baking video stream and the heterosexual people imposing their beliefs upon the man ...it is all about social justice warriors I am sorry to inform you.

[SBRobin]

19 hours ago, Artboy99 said:

 

1. Number 1! Number 1. New all new #1. Etc.

 

I don't hate the first twenty years of the modern age, but this is the main reason I hate things now. I hate the stupid renumbering of the comics. I get why they do it from a business standpoint, but it is so confusing to me as a collector when Spider man jumps to a numbering system every year.