In which oldfolks gape aghast at how dark superheroes are now (major recent spoilers)

[Shawn Hopkins]

Update: The new purpose of this thread, at least for me, is the Atrocity Exhibition, sort of a museum of dark stuff in superhero comics. Part one is on page four. Part two is on page five. Check it out.

So, uh, yeah, as of Spider-Man 631, Spider-Man's decades long struggle to help one of his friends hold onto his humanity is over. He lost.

In issue 631 the Lizard kills and eats his young son, Billy. No going back for Dr. Connors now.

So much for a return to more lighthearted comics after the crossover madness. DC pulled a bait and switch, too, their "Brightest Day" Crossover turns out to be "ironically" named, which I'm sure makes Dan Didio giggle. There's a scene in issue two where.

A mother brutally kills her family with implements from a "Rock Band" type game.

So think of this thread as museum. A catalog of gory unpleasantness and cheap shock that gets the older geeks' blood boiling. I'm going to post some more examples lately but feel free to add your own, recent ones and new ones that come up, and let us know what you think of them.

[Anthonynotes]

So, uh, yeah, as of Spider-Man 631, Spider-Man's decades long struggle to help one of his friends hold onto his humanity is over. He lost.

In issue 631 the Lizard kills and eats his young son, Billy. No going back for Dr. Connors now.

So much for a return to more lighthearted comics after the crossover madness. DC pulled a bait and switch, too, their "Brightest Day" Crossover turns out to be "ironically" named, which I'm sure makes Dan Didio giggle. There's a scene in issue two where.

A mother brutally kills her family with implements from a "Rock Band" type game.

So think of this thread as museum. A catalog of gory unpleasantness and cheap shock that gets the older geeks' blood boiling. I'm going to post some more examples lately but feel free to add your own, recent ones and new ones that come up, and let us know what you think of them.

Re: that second spoiler: um... huh?!? I know I'm going to regret asking, but what the heck sort of storyline involved something like *that* happening?!

Re: the general topic: think the list of nasty comic examples are probably too long to list, though Identity Crisis, Infinite Crisis, and <insert any Joker/Superboy-Prime appearance here> might do for starters...

-B.

[Peter Paltridge]

I'm sorry, but it's really hard for me to take either of the things you just spoiler-tagged very seriously. Death by Rock Band? He ate him?

Those sound like the funniest tragedies since it was discovered Mary Jane makes a "SPWAT" sound when struck. Don't spwat your wife, folks.

[Rusakov]

Good grief. I sometimes like things that are dark and edgy, but this just pole vaults right over it into flat out Angstville.

Just what the heck is Marvel/DC trying to do to people?

[Beat]

I'm sorry, but it's really hard for me to take either of the things you just spoiler-tagged very seriously. Death by Rock Band? He ate him?

Those sound like the funniest tragedies since it was discovered Mary Jane makes a "SPWAT" sound when struck. Don't spwat your wife, folks.

Isn't that worse though? You know, NOT taking the idea of death and tragedy seriously in any direction and just being callous for the sake of looking hardcore?

[Leaping Larry Jojo]

Obviously there is an audience for this kind of thing and DC and Marvel have decided that targeting this narrow but loyal audience is better than trying to change their direction. Ah well.

[wonderfly]

So, uh, yeah, as of Spider-Man 631, Spider-Man's decades long struggle to help one of his friends hold onto his humanity is over. He lost.

In issue 631 the Lizard kills and eats his young son, Billy. No going back for Dr. Connors now.


Maybe the Lizard got tired of Billy never growing up. Billy's been around in comic books since before Reed and Sue Richards even conceived Franklin, yet Billy can't seem to grow old... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lizard_%28comics%29#Continuity)

The Lizard as a character has been messed up for years anyway...

I think the "Heroic Age" doesn't hit the Spider-Man corner of the Marvel universe until after the upcoming "One Moment In Time" (http://marvel.com/news/comicstories.12100.c2e2_2010%7Ecolon%7E_spider-man%7Ecolon%7E_one_moment_in_time) story arc. Having said that, I still expect Marvel to publish "shock and awe" comics on occasion, even during the "Heroic Age". Just because things are more "heroic" doesn't mean the writers won't still go over the top with the villains...(it's not enough to rob banks in a colorful costume, all villains must be evil serial killers nowadays...)

[ryandcow]

The Rockband one was a lady who was a villain in hiding and she beat them to death with the guitar. (I don't remember who she is) A similar thing happened with Black Manta, except he used a knife to kill the patrons of his fish market. Some of the obvious stuff that makes older people cringe, Sue Dinby's rape and subsequent murder, Max Lord's murder. Anything Black Adam does anything Deathstroke does for "buisness". It's all sorta grotesque, my favorites are Ryan Choi's murder (how they let his girlfriend live, which was somehow worse because he had to lie to her about being in trouble like 10 seconds before the murder, and now she is alone; and Ryan died small so they'll never find his body. It's just sick overall.) and Black Adam's murder of Psycho Pirate. "No more silly faces" *pokes eyes through back of pyscho pirate's head*. Nice.

[Anthonynotes]

The Rockband one was a lady who was a villain in hiding and she beat them to death with the guitar. (I don't remember who she is) A similar thing happened with Black Manta, except he used a knife to kill the patrons of his fish market. Some of the obvious stuff that makes older people cringe, Sue Dinby's rape and subsequent murder, Max Lord's murder. Anything Black Adam does anything Deathstroke does for "buisness". It's all sorta grotesque, my favorites are Ryan Choi's murder (how they let his girlfriend live, which was somehow worse because he had to lie to her about being in trouble like 10 seconds before the murder, and now she is alone; and Ryan died small so they'll never find his body. It's just sick overall.) and Black Adam's murder of Psycho Pirate. "No more silly faces" *pokes eyes through back of pyscho pirate's head*. Nice.

Yeah, that bit of Black Adam's came to mind as well. Since nothing says "gritty, gripping realism" like your villain pulling a Moe Howard eye-poke maneuver... but *DEADLY*! :-/

-B.

[ryandcow]

Yea I see what Black Adam does as what Superman is afraid of, a lot of the time he just kills people with a single punch and makes them explode basically. Superman is afraid of not being able to control that strength.

[Shawn Hopkins]

Yea I see what Black Adam does as what Superman is afraid of, a lot of the time he just kills people with a single punch and makes them explode basically. Superman is afraid of not being able to control that strength.

No, he's not. He's must mature and responsible about it and realizes that just because he can poke someone's eyes through his head, he doesn't have to. Black Adam is petty superpowered child by comparison.

[ryandcow]

I mean Black Adam kills people with a single punch, not supes. A lot of times superman seems to feel like the world is made of paper to him. If he lost control of that, it'd be bad.

[Shawn Hopkins]

I Byrne-stole the two books mentioned at the top of this thread to check out the context of them.


The Lizard one was interesting, the Lizard is portrayed as a completely separate personality. He's not always portrayed this way, by the way. He decides to kill Connor's kid because that will cement his status as the Alpha male. Do lizard's have alpha males? Anyway, it's very dark because Billy acts like he always assumed his dad would eat him and is very resigned to it. There's also this crazy lady who watches and seems to be getting off on it.

The Rock Band killing mom is more blase. She's just one of the White Martians that the JLA trapped in human form. In retrospect that probably wasn't their best plan. She cuts her husband with an electric knife, impales her son with drumsticks and beats her daughter to death with the guitar. Then she rips her human skin of and says "Jooonnnzzz" in a scary way. It's a little silly because being superstrong she really didn't have to use the tools like a human serial killer. And I don't think Martian shape-changing powers work that way, do they? I've never seen others need to shed their skins to change.



I still plan to do a large post, sort of an exhibit with images, of some of the major incidents from recent years. But I'm also going to update this with new stuff as it crops up.

And so, on to the preview pages of Rise of Arsenal 3, where Arsenal:

seems to have developed the power of super domestic violence.

http://www.newsarama.com/php/multimedia/album_view.php?gid=2042&page=8

http://i.newsarama.com/images/JLA-RiseOfArsenal-3-5.jpg

http://i.newsarama.com/images/JLA-RiseOfArsenal-3-5.jpg

http://i.newsarama.com/images/JLA-RiseOfArsenal-3-6.jpg

"She likes it rough anyway." Edgy.

Okay, before anybody jumps in I know that despite the clear domestic violence imagery Cheshire is one of the most deadly assassins on the planet. But the grimdark stuff here isn't just the images, look at how Arsenal gets off on it, he's enjoying himself and he's thinking about sex several times. He's using the death of his daughter as an excuse to indulge his dark side, and that's just disgusting.

[Anthonynotes]

(/me reads the spoiler box, and sees he picked a bad time to be eating a sandwich...)

*Sigh*... it's almost as if the comic writers seem to be trying their hardest to live up to every negative stereotype about comics fans, including the ones related to misogyny/sexism, being out-of-touch socially or culturally, and the "30-year-old who lives in their parents' basement" bit. Do the writers *know* any women, or actually *show* this stuff to any women while writing it/coming up with ideas? Do the editors *know* any females or any inkling of saying "no" to stuff like that? Do any of them actually read actual books, or view other types of media---TV shows, movies, newspapers, etc.---to *know* that stuff like that wouldn't be remotely greenlit by anyone else in those fields, and would be seen as a *bad thing* by the general public? Or at least the possibility of someone reading this on a bus not having the man or woman next to them thinking they're some sort of weirdo/nutcase/overgrown child (as if comics didn't have enough of a stigma among the average American)?! Maybe that's part of the reason *why* their sales are so marginal that even the X-Men or Batman are easily outsold by the average issue of "Cat Fancy" (or their sales are easily matched by those thick-sized telephone-book manga like "Shonen Jump", or Archie digests)...

(Breathes) OK, done ranting... for now... :-p

-B.

[Shawn Hopkins]

I read comics in public all the time. I take Archie digests with me and read them when I eat at restaurants without caring what people think. So for me to say I would be embarrassed to read Rise of Arsenal 3 where people could see me doing it is a big deal, but it's true. What kind of stuff would a person think I was into if they looked over my shoulder and saw a half-naked one-armed man doing that to a woman?

[ryandcow]

Chersire should probably call in Osiris, Deathstroke, Tatooman, and the evil version of Fire. I think they could hold off the one armed man who is armed with an extension cord.
@Brainatara- Personally I don't think Identity Crisis should be considered a gore fest or called into the poorly steryotyped dissicussion. It is graphic sure, but at least it is quality material. Meltzer did a great job not falling into the stereotypes you mentioned. (Especially not thinking about other forms of media, especially the books part as Meltzer is a regular book writer.)

[Shawn Hopkins]

Chersire should probably call in Osiris, Deathstroke, Tatooman, and the evil version of Fire. I think they could hold off the one armed man who is armed with an extension cord.
@Brainatara- Personally I don't think Identity Crisis should be considered a gore fest or called into the poorly steryotyped dissicussion. It is graphic sure, but at least it is quality material. Meltzer did a great job not falling into the stereotypes you mentioned. (Especially not thinking about other forms of media, especially the books part as Meltzer is a regular book writer.)

I disagree. Identity Crisis is truly awful and the final reveal makes all of it pointless. I was into it and following the mystery and wondering what the deep motive for it was. Oh wait, she just did it cause she's crazy! No real reason that makes a lick of sense! Well, isn't that a kick in the nuts.

[TheVileOne]

If anyone wants to know the conclusion of that Arsenal scene:

Cheshire/Jade and Arsenal/Roy start having sex but Roy can't "perform" and Jade does the whole, "Its OK there's a lot on your mind." And Roy says, "Shut up Jade."

I pretty much wanted to jump off a balcony.

I'm really starting to resent this whole attitude DC editorial is taking. We are in a post-9/11 world! These guys running around in masks and capes is SERIOUS business.

I don't understand why they are trying to turn DC comics into Watchmen.
I'm sure sooner or later, someone will find Lian Harper alive in well in some sort of pocket universe cosmic cocoon in stasis and Lian will become the new speedy after current Speedy is raped and given cosmic aids by Mongol. And Speedy dies of cosmic AIDS because there is no way anyone in the DCU can treat cosmic AIDS.

[ryandcow]

I don't understand why they are trying to turn DC comics into Watchmen.
I'm sure sooner or later, someone will find Lian Harper alive in well in some sort of pocket universe cosmic cocoon in stasis and Lian will become the new speedy after current Speedy is raped and given cosmic aids by Mongol. And Speedy dies of cosmic AIDS because there is no way anyone in the DCU can treat cosmic AIDS.
Lol. What about Zatanna?

[Shawn Hopkins]

If anyone wants to know the conclusion of that Arsenal scene:

Cheshire/Jade and Arsenal/Roy start having sex but Roy can't "perform" and Jade does the whole, "Its OK there's a lot on your mind." And Roy says, "Shut up Jade."

I pretty much wanted to jump off a balcony.

I'm really starting to resent this whole attitude DC editorial is taking. We are in a post-9/11 world! These guys running around in masks and capes is SERIOUS business.

I don't understand why they are trying to turn DC comics into Watchmen.
I'm sure sooner or later, someone will find Lian Harper alive in well in some sort of pocket universe cosmic cocoon in stasis and Lian will become the new speedy after current Speedy is raped and given cosmic aids by Mongol. And Speedy dies of cosmic AIDS because there is no way anyone in the DCU can treat cosmic AIDS.

The current Speedy already has HIV. So it would be like double HIV. And you left out the part where they give Lian a smack problem.

I don't know if you're serious ryandcow, but there are rules to magic in the DCU that keep Zatanna from being all powerful like that. The main idea is there's no such thing as a free lunch, if you cast a powerful spell there are always consequences somewhere else.

Here's a review of Rise of Arsenal 3 from someone who calls it the worst comic he's read in 25 years, even worse than the haunted vagina issue of Tarot.

http://www.savagecritic.com/brian/i-have-read-the-worst-comic-i-have-ever-read/



Here's the synopsis from the review:

Page 1: Chesire shows up to (theoretically) kill Roy, blaming him for Lian’s death. They fight, and Roy’s thought captions on this page are about how hot she was in bed. No (expletive): ” Next to Kendra (Hawkgirl), Jade was the best in bed.” Chesire has poisonous fingernails that will kill you fairly instantly. She is shown scratching him with those fingernails, though he isn’t poisoned (?), and the scratch marks completely disappear on page 2 (??).

Page 2 -7: they fight, to such scintillating dialogue as “Bite me, Jade.” and “You’re a skilled assassin, but as a mother — YOU SUCKED!”. Roy uses various things sitting around (a tennis racket, a stapler, an extension cord) to battle Chesire — this is apparently Roy’s new superpower, fighting with whatever junk is sitting around, which is excitingly McGyver-esque! Using the extension cord like a whip (which is OK, “She likes it ROUGH anyway”), he ties Chesire up, porn-submission-style. Then they make out, and start to (expletive)….

Page 8: .. except it turns out that he’s impotent!
Chesire then disappears from the comic without another word or mention of her.

Page 9: Since he can’t (expletive), he decides to go beat up guys. “I need a release.” and “For me, they serve their purpose” he thinks, as he sticks knives in faceless people’s arms.

Page 10: full-page splash of Roy standing over a bunch of unconscious guys. “Much better” says the caption as Roy makes an O-face.

Page 11: his dead junkie friend appears, and talks about the time they double-teamed a “couple of real skanks” in Nashville.

Pages 12 & 13: His daughter dead, and his dead friend prodding him, Roy decides to jump down off the rooftop in full costume and buy some heroin from a street dealer.

Page 14 & 15: he smokes heroin and nods out, in a two page spread.

Page 16 & 17: his dead daughter appears to him in his drugged out state.

Page 18 & 19: …but is interrupted by five Prometheus’ in an alley, and he beats and stabs them…

Page 20 & 21 (also a double page spread)… but it turns out that he’s actually just beaten up his junkie alleymates, apparently with a dead cat (!), while Batman shows up and declares Roy needs to stop.
Now I’ve done a number of drugs over the years, but never heroin. I have, however, known a few junkies, and I can assure you that when/after they got high they weren’t capable of fighting ANYthing, or really doing much other than sit there and drool.

Pages 22-25: Roy and Batman fight to the tune of “Roy, I’m your friend” and “I am here to help you”. Yay, Dick!

Pages 26 & 27: Roy wakes up with Black Canary standing over him. He’s strapped to gurney (all four straps!), and Dinah is kind of moralizing without actually sitting with him, and she walks out, rather than stay with him to help him through getting clean. This is apparently in a hospital, though we oddly don’t get a caption explaining this until…

Page 28: Batman and BC talk about how this is a special hospital specializing “in convicted villains with substance abuse problems”

Page 29: Roy apparently babbles to his dead friend some more, but then we turn to…

page 30: and his daughter is there again, this time covered in wounds and gore. “Next Issue… Death of a Hero”, the end.


So Roy goes back on the smack, huh? I don't think whoever wrote this has any knowledge of drugs outside of 80s Nancy Reagan commercials and maybe Saturday Morning All-Stars to the Rescue. Also, Arsenal beats guys with a cat. Was it alive or dead when got hold of it, who knows?

He has a good point about the claws, too. When I saw that Cheshire had scratched him I thought something would surely come of that.

[Angilasman]

Just what the heck is Marvel/DC trying to do to people?

Trying to get them to read creator owned comics released by other publishers? Honestly, it's the only explanation aside from: "they're just really stupid."

[Antiyonder]

The problem with this particular issue is that these particular comics do sell, thus as much as we object to it, the money sends a stronger message.

And truth is, there are several reasons why readers support these comics:

1. Reputation: In truth buying a comic that sexualizes women is debatly more embarassing than buying a kid comic that has more of an optimistic and innocent tone. Just the same, some readers honestly think that the darker comics are more dignifying to read in front of their peers and thus continue picking them up.

2. Lack of awareness: Now I certainly won't argue that most super hero comics this decade are pitch black, but the fact remains is that there have always been several titles that have gone against the sterotype such as (Spider-Girl, Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man, Blue Beetle, Booster Gold, Marvel Adventures, Teen Titans Go, Legion of Super Heroes in the 31st Century, Batman The Brave and The Bold & Dan Slott's work on She-Hulk and Batman Adventures).

But the problem is that the readers clamouring for the more innocent or at least no so dark comics can't or won't seek them out.

3. Trying to support their favorite title: I'm a Spider-Man fan. Got into super hero comics through Spider-Man The Animated Series. But I'm not going to spend money on the comics just because they contain my favorite character. Fact is that Booster Gold, Spider-Girl, Love & Capes and even X-Men Forever hold my interest more than the comic focusing on said character and thus will be where my money goes.

While not all readers do so, many of them will clamour for stories less dark and more carefree. But rather than going for comics which actually contain them, they continue to support the darker comics in hopes that they will get better. And well, the comic book business is literally one where you have to vote with your money rather than words.

[Radical Raven]

Here's the synopsis from the review:

Page 1: Chesire shows up to (theoretically) kill Roy, blaming him for Lian’s death. They fight, and Roy’s thought captions on this page are about how hot she was in bed. No (expletive): ” Next to Kendra (Hawkgirl), Jade was the best in bed.” Chesire has poisonous fingernails that will kill you fairly instantly. She is shown scratching him with those fingernails, though he isn’t poisoned (?), and the scratch marks completely disappear on page 2 (??).

Page 2 -7: they fight, to such scintillating dialogue as “Bite me, Jade.” and “You’re a skilled assassin, but as a mother — YOU SUCKED!”. Roy uses various things sitting around (a tennis racket, a stapler, an extension cord) to battle Chesire — this is apparently Roy’s new superpower, fighting with whatever junk is sitting around, which is excitingly McGyver-esque! Using the extension cord like a whip (which is OK, “She likes it ROUGH anyway”), he ties Chesire up, porn-submission-style. Then they make out, and start to (expletive)….

Page 8: .. except it turns out that he’s impotent!
Chesire then disappears from the comic without another word or mention of her.

Page 9: Since he can’t (expletive), he decides to go beat up guys. “I need a release.” and “For me, they serve their purpose” he thinks, as he sticks knives in faceless people’s arms.

Page 10: full-page splash of Roy standing over a bunch of unconscious guys. “Much better” says the caption as Roy makes an O-face.

Page 11: his dead junkie friend appears, and talks about the time they double-teamed a “couple of real skanks” in Nashville.

Pages 12 & 13: His daughter dead, and his dead friend prodding him, Roy decides to jump down off the rooftop in full costume and buy some heroin from a street dealer.

Page 14 & 15: he smokes heroin and nods out, in a two page spread.

Page 16 & 17: his dead daughter appears to him in his drugged out state.

Page 18 & 19: …but is interrupted by five Prometheus’ in an alley, and he beats and stabs them…

Page 20 & 21 (also a double page spread)… but it turns out that he’s actually just beaten up his junkie alleymates, apparently with a dead cat (!), while Batman shows up and declares Roy needs to stop.
Now I’ve done a number of drugs over the years, but never heroin. I have, however, known a few junkies, and I can assure you that when/after they got high they weren’t capable of fighting ANYthing, or really doing much other than sit there and drool.

Pages 22-25: Roy and Batman fight to the tune of “Roy, I’m your friend” and “I am here to help you”. Yay, Dick!

Pages 26 & 27: Roy wakes up with Black Canary standing over him. He’s strapped to gurney (all four straps!), and Dinah is kind of moralizing without actually sitting with him, and she walks out, rather than stay with him to help him through getting clean. This is apparently in a hospital, though we oddly don’t get a caption explaining this until…

Page 28: Batman and BC talk about how this is a special hospital specializing “in convicted villains with substance abuse problems”

Page 29: Roy apparently babbles to his dead friend some more, but then we turn to…

page 30: and his daughter is there again, this time covered in wounds and gore. “Next Issue… Death of a Hero”, the end.


So Roy goes back on the smack, huh? I don't think whoever wrote this has any knowledge of drugs outside of 80s Nancy Reagan commercials and maybe Saturday Morning All-Stars to the Rescue. Also, Arsenal beats guys with a cat. Was it alive or dead when got hold of it, who knows?

He has a good point about the claws, too. When I saw that Cheshire had scratched him I thought something would surely come of that.



Why are they having sex when their daughter just died? :confused: Dead Cat Clubs and Ghost Junkies aside, that has to be the most confusing thing about that synopsis.

I don't like the art in that sample you posted, either.

But surely, surely some of this stuff gets better executed, right?

[Anthonynotes]

Good points, Antiyonder. My DC buying these days is limited to the non-mainstream-set DC titles (All Star Superman, etc.), reprints of older material (Showcase volumes, etc.) and some of the Johnny DC line---Batman:TBATB, Tiny Titans, Billy Batson and the Power of Shazam, and Super Friends. But yes, people want to see the "real" (mainstream universe) versions of such characters since those titles don't "count", even if it means buying part 1 of 12 of "Joker/Superboy-Prime gruesomely kills his <number_requiring_scientific_notation>th victim in a *completely* unexpected manner, what a surprise!" :-p



@Brainatara- Personally I don't think Identity Crisis should be considered a gore fest or called into the poorly steryotyped dissicussion. It is graphic sure, but at least it is quality material. Meltzer did a great job not falling into the stereotypes you mentioned. (Especially not thinking about other forms of media, especially the books part as Meltzer is a regular book writer.)

Without derailing this into yet another IC debate, yeah, it did suck. Nearly all non-comics stories (TV shows, movies, etc.) that portray a character being raped actually *make* the rape itself, and how the character who was raped reacting/dealing with such horrificness, the *exclusive* focus of the story, since, well, it's *rape*. News flash to superhero comic writers: Rape is *NOT* a disposeable or "B-plot" item, *NOR* is it something to throw in merely for shock value. Showing the same character later killed while pregnant by a crazed ex-wife of a fellow superhero just adds to the ludicrousness (as well as that idiotic Deathstroke fight scene). Any writer who'd not realize this must live under the proverbial rock sensitivity-wise (or at least never watched a single dramatic film, news story, documentary, etc., about the subject/knew anyone that happened to/etc.)... and that's why I added it to this list.

Re: that Arsenal story: Holy flipping Moley, does that sound awful. Guess the writers aren't familiar with drug use/abuse, either... or, um, don't like cats?

-B.

[ryandcow]

Any writer who'd not realize this must live under the proverbial rock sensitivity-wise (or at least never watched a single dramatic film, news story, documentary, etc., about the subject/knew anyone that happened to/etc.)... and that's why I added it to this list.

Re: that Arsenal story: Holy flipping Moley, does that sound awful. Guess the writers aren't familiar with drug use/abuse, either... or, um, don't like cats?

-B.

Lol cause Meltzer writes suspense novels for a living which is kinda ironic, and lol for the hating cats thing.

[TheVileOne]

Some time ago, Willingham wrote a controversial blog about popular comic book superheroes becoming too dark and violent. Now I definitely agree with him. But I'm not just seeing this at Marvel, but it's definitely coming through at DC Comics.

I mean I like Geoff Johns and I think he's a great writer and storyteller. I see he's been promoted at DC Comics. But some of this garbage in the last few years has been absolutely nauseating.

I think something that underscores my resentment is a featurette that was on the Justice League Crisis on Infinite Earths DVD. Levitz DiDio Johns etc. talking about all these new crisis stories. How post-9/11 these stories have to be a lot more ominous and dark. And now we are seeing this shift where mainstream comics and characters are becoming more and more like Alan Moore's Watchmen.

Now I mean I love me some Watchmen, but that's a 25 year old story and it was its own miniseries set in a different world. I just don't get why we have to see this being brought into the DCU and MU canon. I get that the audience for comics is shrinking, but if the idea is to get more kids or youths into reading comics again . . . I mean . . . whatever.

Not long ago I was a substitute teacher, and now it's not surprising why I was seeing kids packing Naruto and One Piece manga books into their backpacks instead of Spider-man and Justice League.

Marvel and DC have been beaten at their own game. Marvel and DCU have sold themselves out to be Alan Moore-lite.

Now let me be clear. I think it's OK to be dark and violent and harsh sometimes. But now superhero comics just seem so mean-spirited and hurtful. They are trying way too hard to show that even though these guys wear capes and masks this is SERIOUS business. But now it's not special anymore.

[Antiyonder]

Now let me be clear. I think it's OK to be dark and violent and harsh sometimes. But now superhero comics just seem so mean-spirited and hurtful. They are trying way too hard to show that even though these guys wear capes and masks this is SERIOUS business. But now it's not special anymore.

As I said above, even during this current Dark Age, there have been and still are super hero titles which go against the trend whether they are part of the all ages line (Marvel Adventures or Johnny DC) or are more well balanced in content and tone. Titles like:

- Blue Beetle
- Booster Gold
- She-Hulk
- Spider-Girl
- Batman Adventures
- The Batman Strikes
- Teen Titans Go
- Legion of Super Heroes In The 31st Century
- Batman The Brave and The Bold
- Love & Capes
- The various Marvel Adventures titles (Two of which are currently Spider-Man and Super Heroes).

But to put the problems short:

1. Some readers are convinced that picking up riske titles will make them cool or mature. They put more stake on their image rather than being entertained.

2. Some readers are unaware of the titles I listed.

3. Some readers are aware of the titles I listed, but they want to have their cake and eat it too. They don't want to pick up superhero titles that are lighthearted and fun, they want the titles that they've read to lighten up.


So while the decade has been dark interms of superhero stories, there have been stories that fans have been requesting, but are ignored. And while it's understandable that you (not refering to anyone in particular) want to support your favorite character/continuity, but if you want Marvel and DC to get the message you need to both:

A. Drop the comment that you find depressing. And:

B. Look for the titles that are actually fun. They are in the minority, but they are out there.

[TheVileOne]

As I said above, even during this current Dark Age, there have been and still are super hero titles which go against the trend whether they are part of the all ages line (Marvel Adventures or Johnny DC) or are more well balanced in content and tone. Titles like:

- Blue Beetle
- Booster Gold
- She-Hulk
- Spider-Girl
- Batman Adventures
- The Batman Strikes
- Teen Titans Go
- Legion of Super Heroes In The 31st Century
- Batman The Brave and The Bold
- Love & Capes
- The various Marvel Adventures titles (Two of which are currently Spider-Man and Super Heroes).

Its nice you made a list and everything antiyonder but a lot of those books aren't even canon in Marvel or DC. Love and Capes is an indy book that comes out like every 3 months. It's not a DC book. I'm talking about mainstream superhero comics.

Teen Titans Go is just an offshoot of the CN series is it not?

Marvel Adventure titles are a kiddie brand of the Marvel characters and not the actual 616 characters. Also, I don't see kids reading these at school. The books I see them packing are Japanese manga.

Joe Quesada claimed that Brand New Day would make Spider-man more appealing to kids again since he wasn't married anymore.


3. Some readers are aware of the titles I listed, but they want to have their cake and eat it too. They don't want to pick up superhero titles that are lighthearted and fun, they want the titles that they've read to lighten up.

All your reasons seem to be pointing at readers. What about editorial?


So while the decade has been dark interms of superhero stories, there have been stories that fans have been requesting, but are ignored. And while it's understandable that you (not refering to anyone in particular) want to support your favorite character/continuity, but if you want Marvel and DC to get the message you need to both:

They are ignored I'd say partly because they are not the books that editorial are pushing like these big events.


A. Drop the comment that you find depressing. And:

B. Look for the titles that are actually fun. They are in the minority, but they are out there.

I read almost all of the books that you mentioned, but a lot of them are specifically kiddie line books basically. Also maybe it's not about being light and fun. Maybe it's just that you know Nightwing doesn't need to be raped. Or maybe Sue Dibny doesn't need to be burned to death. Or at least we don't need to learn she was raped by a c-list villain after she was burned to death while pregnant. Or maybe we didn't need to see the latest issue of Arsenal period.

It doesn't need to be fluffy nonsense but I don't see why it has to be Alan Moore-lite that editorial seems to desperately want mainstream superhero comics to be right now. Its the attitude that DC editorial is presenting in the Justice League DVD featurette that I resent. Because of 9/11 these superhero comics have to be really darker and edgier than ever before. Its disgusting and lugubrious that superhero comics have to worship death now because of 9/11.

Also, I already buy and read Shounen manga. Which is what kids are actually reading in school these days instead of Batman, Superman, and Spider-man.

This is my other point I feel you ignored, Naruto was selling much better with kids than Spider-man. And I mean, does Marvel even wonder why kids like these books and characters more than Spider-man when Joe Quesada claims the whole point of Brand More Day is to make it more appealing to kids again?

[Antiyonder]

Its nice you made a list and everything antiyonder but a lot of those books aren't even canon in Marvel or DC. Love and Capes is an indy book that comes out like every 3 months. It's not a DC book. I'm talking about mainstream superhero comics.

Teen Titans Go is just an offshoot of the CN series is it not?

Marvel Adventure titles are a kiddie brand of the Marvel characters and not the actual 616 characters.

That's part of the point I'm trying to make. If you want tales that aren't overly dark, then it's best to not limit yourself to mainstream entertainment.

Like I said before, I'm a big Spider-Man fan, but I'm not going to spend money on a The Amazing Spider-Man just so I can have a Spider-Man comic on my monthly list. If I can't find fun stories currently featuring the character, I'll go elsewhere.

If it's a choice between a famous character/continuity with unappealing stories and an obscure character/continuity with appealing stories, I choose the latter 100%.

Sure the titles I list aren't mainstream, but it seems to me that the comic's strong point should be likable characters and a compelling story regardless of the popularity or the continuum it's in.


Joe Quesada claimed that Brand New Day would make Spider-man more appealing to kids again since he wasn't married anymore.

The only way I can rationalize the stories in Amazing is that they are aimed at the kids who think that edgy material equals mature. Afterall, a lot of kids these days are in a hurry to grow up. Look at Adult Swim cartoons. While some are well written and clever, most are basically cartoons that just insert profanity, violence and sex to prove how "mature they are".

Which is in line with my first reasoning. A good bulk of readers care more about looking cool and mature infront of their peers than indulging in entertainment.


All your reasons seem to be pointing at readers. What about editorial?

I won't deny that the editorial is to blame, but they are publishing what sells more. If a story with "Spider-Man sleeping with The Black Cat" sells more than "Booster Gold fighting a younger version of himself while dressed as Elvis", then we get more stories with heroes and sex.

Which again is an example of voting with your wallet. They aren't going to listen to vocal complaints, but rather than sound of you getting your money out of your wallet.

And while the Spider-Girl comics fall in the category of not being mainstream, it lacks the overly dark themes you mention, and lacks the decompressed story telling that other posters complain about.


They are ignored I'd say partly because they are not the books that editorial are pushing like these big events.

Sure, but if a reader is unaware of a current title that goes against the trend, then they could always ask for recommendation on forums like this one.


I read almost all of the books that you mentioned, but a lot of them are specifically kiddie line books basically. Also maybe it's not about being light and fun. Maybe it's just that you know Nightwing doesn't need to be raped. Or maybe Sue Dibny doesn't need to be burned to death. Or at least we don't need to learn she was raped by a c-list villain after she was burned to death while pregnant. Or maybe we didn't need to see the latest issue of Arsenal period.

Fair enough, but Booster Gold, Blue Beetle and She-Hulk are definitely part of the mainstream continuity, and thus also lack the problems from the other comics.

I felt it necessary to list the kiddie comics, because there are after all video games, cartoons and comic books aimed at children and sometimes draw in the older crowd.


It doesn't need to be fluffy nonsense but I don't see why it has to be Alan Moore-lite that editorial seems to desperately want mainstream superhero comics to be right now. Its the attitude that DC editorial is presenting in the Justice League DVD featurette that I resent. Because of 9/11 these superhero comics have to be really darker and edgier than ever before. Its disgusting and lugubrious that superhero comics have to worship death now because of 9/11.

I more or less cover this in the other comments in this response.


Also, I already buy and read Shounen manga. Which is what kids are actually reading in school these days instead of Batman, Superman, and Spider-man.

I could certainly understand that they don't buy the individual issues as comic stores aren't always close by, but are you saying that they don't even read a trade paperback featuring Batman, Superman and Spider-Man? Single issues aren't overly available, so I'm not surprised that kids don't walk around with them.


This is my other point I feel you ignored, Naruto was selling much better with kids than Spider-man.

While I'm not a huge fan of Naruto, the stories can at least be fun and exciting, and while there are obviously violent moments, they seem to be done a lot more tastefully than the violence in most mainstream super hero books.

[TheVileOne]

The only way I can rationalize the stories in Amazing is that they are aimed at the kids who think that edgy material equals mature. Afterall, a lot of kids these days are in a hurry to grow up. Look at Adult Swim cartoons. While some are well written and clever, most are basically cartoons that just insert profanity, violence and sex to prove how "mature they are".

Or the way I see it they are simply not trying to broaden their demographics.


Which is in line with my first reasoning. A good bulk of readers care more about looking cool and mature infront of their peers than indulging in entertainment.

Kids aren't reading these books to look mature. Most of them just aren't reading these books PERIOD.



I won't deny that the editorial is to blame, but they are publishing what sells more. If a story with "Spider-Man sleeping with The Black Cat" sells more than "Booster Gold fighting a younger version of himself while dressed as Elvis", then we get more stories with heroes and sex

Comparing a Spider-man book to a Booster Gold book is irrelevant, illegitimate, and invalid as an example. A Booster Gold book will NEVER sell more than a Spider-man book no matter what's in the main Spider-man book.


Which again is an example of voting with your wallet. They aren't going to listen to vocal complaints, but rather than sound of you getting your money out of your wallet.

I am voting with my wallet. But we still have discussions on these forums for a reason. I don't buy these arsenal books. I don't buy ASM. I don't buy all these grisly dark mainstream superhero books at all. I do keep up with them though. But I don't buy them.


And while the Spider-Girl comics fall in the category of not being mainstream, it lacks the overly dark themes you mention, and lacks the decompressed story telling that other posters complain about.

Spider-girl is nothing more than a future AU MC2 offshoot that's barely survived. I'm not counting it.


I felt it necessary to list the kiddie comics, because there are after all video games, cartoons and comic books aimed at children and sometimes draw in the older crowd.

The problem is it's no wonder kids have abandoned mainstream books today despite editorial's claims of wanting to draw them back in.


I could certainly understand that they don't buy the individual issues as comic stores aren't always close by, but are you saying that they don't even read a trade paperback featuring Batman, Superman and Spider-Man? Single issues aren't overly available, so I'm not surprised that kids don't walk around with them.

I don't see them carrying around Spider-man trades. Group after group have stuffed their book bags with things like BLEACH, ONE PIECE, and NARUTO.


While I'm not a huge fan of Naruto, the stories can at least be fun and exciting, and while there are obviously violent moments, they seem to be done a lot more tastefully than the violence in most mainstream super hero books.

Here's the point I'm making. Mainstream superhero books have abandoned the interests of kids and younger readers where things like Shounen manga have picked up the slack. Marvel and DC don't seem to care that all these kids are reading Japanese manga books while not even touching Marvel Comics anymore while Quesada has claimed that Spider-man being married makes him like kryptonite to kids. Spider-man being single again will make him more appealing to kids and readers again. And yet, more kids are not buying Spider-man again post Brand New Day. So instead it's pointed to kiddie themed books to draw in the younger readers when that sounds like a lame excuse.

I'm not saying these have to be like all ages kiddie books where no one ever gets hurt, but that's definitely not the case with Shounen manga. I'd say there's a far greater maturity to some Shounen manga and how fighting, violence, and death is addressed than the death worshipping post-9/11 CAPES AND MARKS ARE SERIOUS BUSINESS books.

[Wonderwall]

I could certainly understand that they don't buy the individual issues as comic stores aren't always close by, but are you saying that they don't even read a trade paperback featuring Batman, Superman and Spider-Man? Single issues aren't overly available, so I'm not surprised that kids don't walk around with them.

I don't think I have ever seen a person under the age of 30( or guys who look like they're 30 but are probably 19:ack:) reading a trade. Once in awhile I see a kid reading single issues of comics at Chapters but that seems very rare.

[Anthonynotes]

Another few possible reasons for those kids reading manga:
- they can already watch Batman, Superman, etc. multiple times a day on TV (various cartoons and movies)---little need to bother buying a comic of the characters...

- they like the types of stories manga tells more than the superhero genre, or manga's telling the types of stories that DC and Marvel have long left for dead (teen humor, adventure, romance, etc.) to myopically focus on superheroes-only. Wider general appeal and all that.

- better buy for the money ($5-$10 for a paperback manga vs. $4 for a floppy comic?)

- B.

[Ed Liu]

Its nice you made a list and everything antiyonder but a lot of those books aren't even canon in Marvel or DC. Love and Capes is an indy book that comes out like every 3 months. It's not a DC book. I'm talking about mainstream superhero comics.
Why should it matter that any of the comics listed aren't the "mainstream" titles? It seems like that would arbitrarily limit the discussion to a few specific books rather than "superhero comics" in general, as you seemed to be doing in your initial post. Besides, it's not like the mainstream books are more accessible in a physical or conceptual way (can't get them except in comic shops or impenetrable, inconsistently numbered TPBs, and there's that big, scary bugaboo of "continuity" hovering over them).

I'd also argue that if Booster Gold isn't a valid basis for comparison, then neither is The Rise of Arsenal no matter how awful it is, since he's a character that not even a lot of superhero comic book fans know anything about, and his headline book is never ever going to sell at Spider-Man numbers, either, even if it does say "Justice League" in front of it. I don't think that changing the title Justice League: Booster Gold is going to make anybody pay any more attention to it than they already are.


Marvel Adventure titles are a kiddie brand of the Marvel characters and not the actual 616 characters. Also, I don't see kids reading these at school. The books I see them packing are Japanese manga.

Joe Quesada claimed that Brand New Day would make Spider-man more appealing to kids again since he wasn't married anymore.I'll take Marvel Adventures Avengers over the current mainstream Avengers books any day. It's a whole lot more readable and a million times more fun than the turgid, self-important stuff I read in Bendis' comics. The Bizarre Adventures (http://www.amazon.com/Marvel-Adventures-Avengers-Vol-Bizarre/dp/0785123083/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1275058539&sr=8-1) digest has some of the most awesome superhero comics of the past decade. My experiences reading the other books are that they are also not "kiddie" titles as much as they're the same high-quality, all-ages superhero comics that all the comic book companies used to publish and which you (and Bill Willingham) say that you want more of. I don't think you're being fair by casually dismissing them so completely out of hand. The last run Dan Slott did on Batman Adventures was absolutely amazing, way better than the editorially mandated crossover madness in the mainstream Batman titles, and I consider it a great injustice that comic book fans didn't respond to it in mass because they assumed it was "the kiddie book."

Joe Quesada says a lot of things, but experience has taught me that he'll happily contradict himself or supply logic for decisions that completely falls apart at the slightest scrutiny. He has a bizarre need to rationalize his decisions to the public, and frankly, I'm amazed that anybody listens to anything at all that he says. No matter what he said about why "One More Day/Brand New Day" was necessary, the reality is that he just didn't want Spider-Man to be married any more.

In any event, I learned a while ago to follow creators over characters, because the creator can make a lame character interesting or a great character awful, but I'm also just not all that interested in the most of the on-going soap operas of superhero comics any more. Most of what I see and hear like this and the arrested development stuff going on at DC specifically seems almost designed to drive me away, but it's really not news that their publishing efforts haven't been trying to appeal to anyone other than the narrow demographic they already have. If they're insistent on publishing the awfully written borderline sexist and racist material they are, they can go ahead. I'll just go read other stuff.

[TheVileOne]

Why should it matter that any of the comics listed aren't the "mainstream" titles? It seems like that would arbitrarily limit the discussion to a few specific books rather than "superhero comics" in general, as you seemed to be doing in your initial post. Besides, it's not like the mainstream books are more accessible in a physical or conceptual way (can't get them except in comic shops or impenetrable, inconsistently numbered TPBs, and there's that big, scary bugaboo of "continuity" hovering over them).

Because they basically aren't. They are not the "real" stories.


I'd also argue that if Booster Gold isn't a valid basis for comparison, then neither is The Rise of Arsenal no matter how awful it is, since he's a character that not even a lot of superhero comic book fans know anything about, and his headline book is never ever going to sell at Spider-Man numbers, either, even if it does say "Justice League" in front of it. I don't think that changing the title Justice League: Booster Gold is going to make anybody pay any more attention to it than they already are.

I'm saying comparing the sales of Booster Gold and Spider-man are not valid and they aren't.


I'll take Marvel Adventures Avengers over the current mainstream Avengers books any day. It's a whole lot more readable and a million times more fun than the turgid, self-important stuff I read in Bendis' comics. The Bizarre Adventures (http://www.amazon.com/Marvel-Adventures-Avengers-Vol-Bizarre/dp/0785123083/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1275058539&sr=8-1) digest has some of the most awesome superhero comics of the past decade. My experiences reading the other books are that they are also not "kiddie" titles as much as they're the same high-quality, all-ages superhero comics that all the comic book companies used to publish and which you (and Bill Willingham) say that you want more of. I don't think you're being fair by casually dismissing them so completely out of hand. The last run Dan Slott did on Batman Adventures was absolutely amazing, way better than the editorially mandated crossover madness in the mainstream Batman titles, and I consider it a great injustice that comic book fans didn't respond to it in mass because they assumed it was "the kiddie book."

The existence of these books does not dismiss the sins and problems of these death worshipping comics. I'm not saying all these kiddie books are bad or not worth buying, but I feel that pointing at the existence of these issues should not excuse the content of the other comics and attitude that editorial has taken to death worshipping post-9/11 costumes and masks are serious business.

Antiyonder made a list and said, well look at all these books that are more light and fun and don't have that type of content and a lot of people aren't buying them as much as the others. Well I mean . . . that's good and everything but why should editors be let off the hook because of that?


Joe Quesada says a lot of things, but experience has taught me that he'll happily contradict himself or supply logic for decisions that completely falls apart at the slightest scrutiny. He has a bizarre need to rationalize his decisions to the public, and frankly, I'm amazed that anybody listens to anything at all that he says. No matter what he said about why "One More Day/Brand New Day" was necessary, the reality is that he just didn't want Spider-Man to be married any more.

OK so he says this and that, but he still said the younger readers thing. So I'm simply holding him to task for saying that. And when we see what's going on in Spider-man these days, it's not surprising kids still aren't reading Spider-man comics. These characters still are not more accessible to kids. They've stopped trying.


In any event, I learned a while ago to follow creators over characters, because the creator can make a lame character interesting or a great character awful, but I'm also just not all that interested in the most of the on-going soap operas of superhero comics any more. Most of what I see and hear like this and the arrested development stuff going on at DC specifically seems almost designed to drive me away, but it's really not news that their publishing efforts haven't been trying to appeal to anyone other than the narrow demographic they already have. If they're insistent on publishing the awfully written borderline sexist and racist material they are, they can go ahead. I'll just go read other stuff.

It doesn't sound like you are disagreeing with me Ed. But you know maybe what Bill Willingham wrote that got widely discussed a while ago had a point.

[wonderfly]

Because they basically aren't. They are not the "real" stories.


A good point. Joe Quesada and Didio always bring up the defesnse "well, the 'main' Marvel/DC universe comics sell best, so that's what we're going to keep pumping out. So sex and violence must be what the fans want, since they keep buying it."

But the thing is, we buy it because we love the characters, and will always support the characters*, but that doesn't mean we approve of a butchering of the character's lives and a darkening of the universe...

It occurs to me just now that I long for the days when we had a Comics Code authority telling Marvel and DC what they could and could not print in their comies...maybe if we had somebody telling Didio "No, you can't rape Sue Diby" things would be better...is the Comics Code Authority still around even?!?

* = Even though I won't buy most mainstream Marvel titles anymore, I'll still read about their adventures through the Marvel Digital website...

[Leaping Larry Jojo]

A good point. Joe Quesada and Didio always bring up the defesnse "well, the 'main' Marvel/DC universe comics sell best, so that's what we're going to keep pumping out. So sex and violence must be what the fans want, since they keep buying it."

But the thing is, we buy it because we love the characters, and will always support the characters*, but that doesn't mean we approve of a butchering of the character's lives and a darkening of the universe...

...

That's a very curious phenomenon I still don't get with today's comic fans. It's almost akin to complaining about the government and then not voting.

It doesn't matter that you don't like what Marvel/DC is doing. If you don't like it, the best way to speak is through your wallets. Remember, comics is a business. They don't listen to fan complaints, they listen to fan wallets.

It's good that you aren't buying their titles, because until more people broaden their horizons and get out of the "I love this character no matter how crappy he's written or drawn" mindset, nothing will ever change in the creative direction some of you so love to hate on.

Frankly, aside from reprints (and by now I have most that I want already), Marvel hasn't seen a dime from me since Quesada took over. I like DC currently only a little better, but I haven't picked up anything from them either past the reprints in recent years.

[TheVileOne]

I'm already voting with my wallet and I'm not buying the books I have serious problems with. I buy Booster Gold every month.

But I still think this is a serious problem and I think kids not buying comics is still being ignored.

[Shawn Hopkins]

But the thing is, we buy it because we love the characters, and will always support the characters*, but that doesn't mean we approve of a butchering of the character's lives and a darkening of the universe...



Yes it does. You are literally paying them to do that. If you ignored the bad stuff and only bought the good stuff, they'd be forced to stop making the bad stuff because they couldn't afford to. It can't even be justified by saying one needs one's monthly Superman fix, to use him as an example. There's no way most people who keep buying this stuff have read all of the hundreds of past Superman comics available in reprint and back issues. You could read a well-done Superman comic every month for the rest of your life and never have to touch DC's current output.

I'd like to point out here that Rise of Arsenal also seems to be ironically named. Every indication is that the point of the series isn't to help Arsenal get over his daughter's death and become a hero again, it's to turn him into a villain (I guess DC would call it antihero) who will join Deathstroke's team. You know, the team that killed Ryan Choi so the Atom could be white again.

When it looks like you see the light at the end of the tunnel in the DCU, that's probably a train.

[wonderfly]

It's good that you aren't buying their titles, because until more people broaden their horizons and get out of the "I love this character no matter how crappy he's written or drawn" mindset, nothing will ever change in the creative direction some of you so love to hate on.


To be fair, the reason I stopped picking up the majority of titles was due to the price increase (which is a discussion going on in another thread currently), not due to the increased level of violence and sex...of course, I always felt that DC was the worse offender, whereas Marvel's was tolerable for the most part...but I am left wondering now if maybe I tolerated it so well because I'm such a fanboy for Marvel...

[Leaping Larry Jojo]

I'm already voting with my wallet and I'm not buying the books I have serious problems with. I buy Booster Gold every month.

But I still think this is a serious problem and I think kids not buying comics is still being ignored.

I think kids not buying superhero comics exclusively anymore is a good thing though. In fact, I find it amazing that the American comic book industry was basically being dominated by a single genre for almost 30 years. Now we're just seeing that same genre cannibalize itself as the industry is changing around them. It's sad.

But the American comic book industry should never have gotten dominated by one genre in the first place. Imagine if prose fiction was dominated by a single genre for an extended length of time--almost mindboggling.

[Rick Jones]

It occurs to me just now that I long for the days when we had a Comics Code authority telling Marvel and DC what they could and could not print in their comies...maybe if we had somebody telling Didio "No, you can't rape Sue Diby" things would be better...is the Comics Code Authority still around even?!?

I think their seal of approval is still visible on Archie and Johnny DC titles but nobody's really checking for the CCA. I think that the CCA's involvement today wouldn't really eliminate much of the content that we see. Things like Black Adam ripping a person in half might still happen but it might have been depicted in a much subtler way artistically.

[wonderfly]

Yes it does. You are literally paying them to do that. If you ignored the bad stuff and only bought the good stuff, they'd be forced to stop making the bad stuff because they couldn't afford to.

Well, sometimes you don't know a comic is going to be bad until it's released and already on your pull list. Whether or not you actually buy the comic, you've already had it ordered 3 months in advance, and so DC/Marvel have made their profit before we the fans can spew hatred for it.

For other people, it's about not having their run of comics interrupted with gaps (they say "I'll just grin and bear it, this writer/artist won't be around for long before there's a new creative team", which is true...anymore, you don't have to wait very long for a new writer to come along and for the direction to change).

Comics are a serialized form of entertainment, it's not exactly the same as being a third of a way into a book before deciding "This book sucks, I'm not finishing it".

Take a book like Amazing Spider-Man...don't like the fact that the Lizard ate his kid? Give it a few months (weeks, in this case), and a different writer (Mark Waid or Dan Slott) will be back with a better story perhaps more to your liking. But by the time the Lizard arc finished and you realized how disgusting it was going to get, you had already come to the end of the story arc. So Marvel's already made a profit. The only surefire way to avoid any obscene sex and violence is to quit the Marvel (or DC) universe alltogether. But then you miss out on the surprisingly good story arcs inbetween the bad moments...it all balances out, (or so most fans feel, I suspect).


I think their seal of approval is still visible on Archie and Johnny DC titles but nobody's really checking for the CCA. I think that the CCA's involvement today wouldn't really eliminate much of the content that we see. Things like Black Adam ripping a person in half might still happen but it might have been depicted in a much subtler way artistically.

A good point. It should be noted that violent things were occuring in Marvel Comics back in the 60's and 70's, which just didn't see it so graphically. This, I blame on the coarsening of American culture. That's just our society at work. 30 years from now, we might look back at Black Adam ripping people apart as bland compared to what's coming out in the future...

Then again, the violence of the comics of the 40's made way for the Code of the 50's and 60's...perhaps there will be a shift back again from the "grim" comics we see published nowadays...

[Leaping Larry Jojo]

A good point. It should be noted that violent things were occuring in Marvel Comics back in the 60's and 70's, which just didn't see it so graphically. This, I blame on the coarsening of American culture. That's just our society at work. 30 years from now, we might look back at Black Adam ripping people apart as bland compared to what's coming out in the future...

Then again, the violence of the comics of the 40's made way for the Code of the 50's and 60's...perhaps there will be a shift back again from the "grim" comics we see published nowadays...

The issue here isn't that comics are getting too violent, it's that a genre previously targeting kids has apparently become too violent.

But this is where you have to understand and accept--"Main line" Marvel and DC don't really target kids anymore. Superhero comics, somewhat perversely, aren't for kids anymore. Asking them to go back to "the good old days" probably isn't a realistic request anymore.

The void for kids' comics has been filled by shonen and shojo manga, and kid friendly comic titles from other companies anyway, so it's not like people stopped releasing comics for kids. What you're seeing is just some shifts in the key demographics. Plus, as Shawn said, there are plenty of kid-friendly "canon" superhero titles out there in reprint form as well. Who says one "has to" read only what's currently being released monthly?

And there's a big problem with this thread in that "what's wrong with the comics industry" is basically just a "what's wrong with DC and Marvel" thread. It's myopic commentary at its best. When people talk about the "grim and gritty" movement in comics, what they really mean is superhero comics ONLY. The truth is there is plenty of stuff out there if you wrap your head around the idea that WOW, there are good comics outside of Marvel and DC's superheroes! Just because WE grew up with Spider-Man and Batman and Superman doesn't mean that today's kids have to. Today's kids are more familiar Naruto and Bleach and I for one have no problem with that. One of the most dismaying scenes in a comic store is when a parent tries to push Spider-Man and Batman comics onto their kids when they're more interested in Bongo or manga. Comics blogger (and manager of a local comics store up here in Toronto) wrote a bit about this:
http://comics212.net/2009/11/22/the-myth-of-all-ages/



But the only time I’ve ever encountered someone who wants to buy their kid a comic exactly like they read as a kid? Die-hard superhero fans. It’s that defensiveness again, not only are superhero comics awesome and modern mythology and whatever, but they’re the only comics that they want their kid reading. I’ve seen some pretty appalling behaviour too, parents outright refusing to buy a young reader something they’re actually interested in (Simpsons, Disney, NARUTO) because the parent used to Looooove Spider-Man as a kid and hey you liked the movie didn’t you champ remember we saw all three come on get a Spider-Man comic.

[Antiyonder]

Asking them to go back to "the good old days" probably isn't a realistic request anymore.

Thing is, that no one is asking them to go back to the good old days. We only request that the adult material be done more tastefully.

Look at the DC Animated Universe shows. Granted, they are for kids, but they have arguably the same appeal as the modern age comics. Only difference is that the DCAU can show it's mature without rape and murder.

But to clarify the problem, here's my analogy:

The majority of the mainstream DC Universe: Most of these comics are basically like the people you meet who use excessive profanity because it "proves his maturity".

The DC Animated Universe: This is person actually is mature. He doesn't go out of his way to prove his maturity. Major rule of maturity afterall is "just because you can do something, doesn't mean that you should".

Booster Gold, Love & Capes and even SLG's Gargoyles series (which, btw, has less limitations than the animated series) were aimed for the older readers, but not through rape and brutalized murder, but through intelligent writing. Even then, the adult moments are tastefully done.

[Leaping Larry Jojo]

Thing is, that no one is asking them to go back to the good old days. We only request that the adult material be done more tastefully.

Look at the DC Animated Universe shows. Granted, they are for kids, but they have arguably the same appeal as the modern age comics. Only difference is that the DCAU can show it's mature without rape and murder.

But to clarify the problem, here's my analogy:

The majority of the mainstream DC Universe: Most of these comics are basically like the people you meet who use excessive profanity because it "proves his maturity".

The DC Animated Universe: This is person actually is mature. He doesn't go out of his way to prove his maturity. Major rule of maturity afterall is "just because you can do something, doesn't mean that you should".

Booster Gold, Love & Capes and even SLG's Gargoyles series (which, btw, has less limitations than the animated series) were aimed for the older readers, but not through rape and brutalized murder, but through intelligent writing. Even then, the adult moments are tastefully done.

Adult material done more tastefully, in the examples you listed, basically means that they'd be more kid-friendly as well. The DC animated universe appeals to both kids and adults, as you said, but it doesn't appeal to DC's current comics audience. They want it pushed to the limit, so DC delivers it.

I think DC and Marvel's mainstream line is probably going to be in or around that path for quite a while. These diehard superhero customers are going to be around for another several decades yet.

[Rick Jones]

And there's a big problem with this thread in that "what's wrong with the comics industry" is basically just a "what's wrong with DC and Marvel" thread. It's myopic commentary at its best. When people talk about the "grim and gritty" movement in comics, what they really mean is superhero comics ONLY. The truth is there is plenty of stuff out there if you wrap your head around the idea that WOW, there are good comics outside of Marvel and DC's superheroes! Just because WE grew up with Spider-Man and Batman and Superman doesn't mean that today's kids have to. Today's kids are more familiar Naruto and Bleach and I for one have no problem with that. One of the most dismaying scenes in a comic store is when a parent tries to push Spider-Man and Batman comics onto their kids when they're more interested in Bongo or manga. Comics blogger (and manager of a local comics store up here in Toronto) wrote a bit about this:
http://comics212.net/2009/11/22/the-myth-of-all-ages/

I think there might be lots of kids out there that love the superhero characters, as evidenced by the love and success that the big budget pictures receive, but something is turning them off of the printed stuff. I couldn't tell you what it is but something's not clicking.

[wonderfly]

They want it pushed to the limit, so DC delivers it.


No, see, I don't think they do. Nobody I think wants gratuitous sex and violence, they just want to continue enjoying the comics they grew up on. They want timeless Batman stories like those told in the Batman animated universe, but they want those stories applied to the main universe for THEIR characters (not a comic book published as a spin off for a TV show).

I think we have two different discussions mixing together: the "grim and gritty" era of comics, vs. the main readership still wanting to enjoy the same characters...

[Antiyonder]

I think there might be lots of kids out there that love the superhero characters, as evidenced by the love and success that the big budget pictures receive, but something is turning them off of the printed stuff. I couldn't tell you what it is but something's not clicking.


I'd have to say then that the stories just aren't fun. The Marvel movies while being far more serious in tone than the Silver Age are actually still fun. You can get a good laugh out of the stories.

Heck, in my opinion, The Dark Knight as grim as it gets isn't as depressing as most of the dark material we get in comics.



I think we have two different discussions mixing together: the "grim and gritty" era of comics, vs. the main readership still wanting to enjoy the same characters...

I tend to think they coincide. A lot of longtime readers do want to see the grim and gritty moments downplayed, but while some are willing to let go of their favorite character/title to do so, others are unwilling to let go, thus ensuring that the controversal titled gets enough financial support.


Take a book like Amazing Spider-Man...don't like the fact that the Lizard ate his kid? Give it a few months (weeks, in this case), and a different writer (Mark Waid or Dan Slott) will be back with a better story perhaps more to your liking. But by the time the Lizard arc finished and you realized how disgusting it was going to get, you had already come to the end of the story arc.

It's not simply a case of a story being bad, but the method of telling stories in general. One month the character is cussing like a sailor, next month rape (which I believe the Chameleon did a while back), the other murder and later limb dismemberment.

[TheVileOne]

On the Justice League DVD though, it was all of DC editorial that was pushing this attitude and era for mainstream superhero comics. And they basically said because of 9/11 that this is SERIOUS BUSINESS now. Things have to be darker and edgier now because of 9/11. Like 9/11 somehow shattered all of our collective innocence about superheroes.

[Ed Liu]

Because they basically aren't. They are not the "real" stories.
But by that justification, neither are the movies or the TV shows that are based on those comics, even they're significantly better than most of the comics they're based on. Doesn't seem right to me. Besides, if it has to be in the "real" book for it to matter, what to make of the fact that the best and most influential Batman story of the past 20 years was never part of the "real" story and is technically not in continuity?

I just think that you're being awfully arbitrary in your rationale for saying, "Those books don't matter," especially since they're pretty strong counter-arguments to your declaration that Marvel and DC's editorial boards are determined to make everything more adult.


It doesn't sound like you are disagreeing with me Ed. But you know maybe what Bill Willingham wrote that got widely discussed a while ago had a point.I don't think we are disagreeing on the major point that most of the main superhero books from DC and Marvel aren't very good. However, I had major problems with what Bill Willingham wrote at the time (http://www.toonzone.net/forums/showthread.php?p=3117247#post3117247), mostly because I felt like he didn't say anything more than, "I don't like most of the superhero comic books coming out of Marvel and DC right now" and then surrounded it with a lot of unnecessary socio-political justification that made no sense.

I don't like most of the superhero comic books coming out of Marvel and DC right now. I think they're really, really badly written and not much fun to read. I could talk about why I think they're badly written, but if I'm not reading the books, I don't think it's worth it.


On the Justice League DVD though, it was all of DC editorial that was pushing this attitude and era for mainstream superhero comics. And they basically said because of 9/11 that this is SERIOUS BUSINESS now. Things have to be darker and edgier now because of 9/11. Like 9/11 somehow shattered all of our collective innocence about superheroes.
While I thought that whole featurette was infuriatingly self-congratulatory, I don't think that this rationale/rationalization has anything to do with the direction DC's taken, any more than I think Joe Q's justifications have anything to do with the real reasons why Marvel does what it does. As you've pointed out, they're just doing bad retreads of The Dark Knight Returns and Watchmen, but they've been doing that over and over and over ever since those books came out. I don't see any substantive difference between these books now and the equally awful EX-TREEEEEEEEMEEMEEMEEEEEE!!!!! books of the 90's. They do it because it sells. The rest of it is just used car salesmanship, and who believes the used car salesman? Sure, they're lying and we know they're lying and you can call them on the lie, but they're just going to tell you another one in response. At least Stan Lee is more charming about it.

In a way, I suppose this is also why I'm not all that committed to raging about the comic companies' offenses now. Got that out of my system in the 90's. Nothing changed. We still got rafts of crappy comics, but we still got some gems, too. I quit comics for a while, mostly because at that point DC and Marvel (and, to a far lesser extent, Image and Dark Horse) were the only games in town. These days, I can stop reading Marvel and DC almost entirely (and I have), but still spend almost the same amount on "comics" per month and be much happier with what I end up with. There are lots of alternatives out there now and they're not that hard to find.


It occurs to me just now that I long for the days when we had a Comics Code authority telling Marvel and DC what they could and could not print in their comics...maybe if we had somebody telling Didio "No, you can't rape Sue Diby" things would be better...is the Comics Code Authority still around even?!?
The CCA is still around, but DC and Marvel abandoned them some time ago. Marvel attempted a ratings system on their books, which was nice except that I never once saw anything anywhere explaining what their ratings meant. DC never went for the ratings system other than the "Suggested for Mature Readers" label.

I think we wouldn't have Sue Dibney being raped on the JL Watchtower if the CCA were still in effect, but we would have also lost things like the Patriot plot twist of Young Avengers (drugs), probably Runaways in its entirety (bad guys were allowed to succeed, even temporarily), and collected output of Vertigo (all of the above). The CCA had a nasty habit of losing the forest for the trees because they had The Rules, the first of which was that you couldn't break The Rules. Ever. I think we're better off on balance without the CCA.


Then again, the violence of the comics of the 40's made way for the Code of the 50's and 60's...perhaps there will be a shift back again from the "grim" comics we see published nowadays...

Maybe, but I wouldn't hold my breath. I don't think the grim-and-gritty comics ever went away from the last time they dominated the business. They're just only dominating one corner of the business now rather than its near-entirety. There was a small shift away from grim-and-gritty after the late-90's implosion, but the fact that the comic companies could believe that it was all those speculators' fault meant they could continue believing that they didn't do anything wrong with their content.

[wonderfly]

The CCA is still around, but DC and Marvel abandoned them some time ago. Marvel attempted a ratings system on their books, which was nice except that I never once saw anything anywhere explaining what their ratings meant. DC never went for the ratings system other than the "Suggested for Mature Readers" label.

I think we wouldn't have Sue Dibney being raped on the JL Watchtower if the CCA were still in effect, but we would have also lost things like the Patriot plot twist of Young Avengers (drugs), probably Runaways in its entirety (bad guys were allowed to succeed, even temporarily), and collected output of Vertigo (all of the above). The CCA had a nasty habit of losing the forest for the trees because they had The Rules, the first of which was that you couldn't break The Rules. Ever. I think we're better off on balance without the CCA.


When you put it in that light, it gets me to thinking: the mentality at Marvel and DC right now is like teenagers off to college, now free from "The Rules" of the parents. Yes, I know the CCA was too overly zealous at times, and Marvel and DC are in rebellion because of it. They've cast off their governing body, and are now indulging in gratuitousness just because they can. Maybe that means they'll eventually "grow up" and leave the frat party behavior behind? It's either that, or they'll die of alcohol intoxication or a drug overdose...

As far as rating systems go, I think it would help if Marvel made all of their Heroic Age titles to have an "All Ages" rating. That would be a true shift in storytelling style...Then again, I think Marvel's rating system is messed up: Amazing Spider-Man 631 (http://marvel.com/catalog/?id=14958), the "Lizard devours kid" issue is rated "A" ("appropriate for ages 9 and up"). How is that appropriate for a 9 year old?

I mean, kids can read about monsters eating kids (in a grandiose fashion, like "trolls under the bridge" and such) but a story about a man loosing touch with his humanity and devouring his son?!?

[TheVileOne]

But by that justification, neither are the movies or the TV shows that are based on those comics, even they're significantly better than most of the comics they're based on. Doesn't seem right to me. Besides, if it has to be in the "real" book for it to matter, what to make of the fact that the best and most influential Batman story of the past 20 years was never part of the "real" story and is technically not in continuity?

This has nothing to do with movies or TV shows. I'm talking about the main line of comics by DC and Marvel and how far off the path they've gone.


I just think that you're being awfully arbitrary in your rationale for saying, "Those books don't matter," especially since they're pretty strong counter-arguments to your declaration that Marvel and DC's editorial boards are determined to make everything more adult.

Because most of these books are off shoot kiddie themed books and not part of the main line of books.


I don't think we are disagreeing on the major point that most of the main superhero books from DC and Marvel aren't very good. However, I had major problems with what Bill Willingham wrote at the time (http://www.toonzone.net/forums/showthread.php?p=3117247#post3117247), mostly because I felt like he didn't say anything more than, "I don't like most of the superhero comic books coming out of Marvel and DC right now" and then surrounded it with a lot of unnecessary socio-political justification that made no sense.

I think Willingham made a good point in books like Spider-man becoming way too dark, violent, and edgy.


While I thought that whole featurette was infuriatingly self-congratulatory, I don't think that this rationale/rationalization has anything to do with the direction DC's taken, any more than I think Joe Q's justifications have anything to do with the real reasons why Marvel does what it does. As you've pointed out, they're just doing bad retreads of The Dark Knight Returns and Watchmen, but they've been doing that over and over and over ever since those books came out. I don't see any substantive difference between these books now and the equally awful EX-TREEEEEEEEMEEMEEMEEEEEE!!!!! books of the 90's. They do it because it sells. The rest of it is just used car salesmanship, and who believes the used car salesman? Sure, they're lying and we know they're lying and you can call them on the lie, but they're just going to tell you another one in response. At least Stan Lee is more charming about it.

Does it really sell that well? And why are they continuing to shut out and not target younger readers anymore? It's like they've given up. And on the same hand if Spider-man being single to be more appealing to young kids is a fosh, why not just have Spider-man get a divorce. Why can't Wolverine smoke cigars anymore?

The fact is that kids are reading sequential art in school, but they aren't reading Spider-man, X-men, and Batman.


In a way, I suppose this is also why I'm not all that committed to raging about the comic companies' offenses now. Got that out of my system in the 90's. Nothing changed. We still got rafts of crappy comics, but we still got some gems, too. I quit comics for a while, mostly because at that point DC and Marvel (and, to a far lesser extent, Image and Dark Horse) were the only games in town. These days, I can stop reading Marvel and DC almost entirely (and I have), but still spend almost the same amount on "comics" per month and be much happier with what I end up with. There are lots of alternatives out there now and they're not that hard to find.

I guess you are referring to the whole gimmick age metal foil covers, image era, bronze age and everything.

I still buy the books that I like. I don't support or buy the books that I don't like. But I mean, I was a huge Green Lantern fan a little while ago, and Blackest Night and Brightest day is seriously muddling all that for me. And before that Grant Morrison and Final Crisis.


I think we wouldn't have Sue Dibney being raped on the JL Watchtower if the CCA were still in effect, but we would have also lost things like the Patriot plot twist of Young Avengers (drugs), probably Runaways in its entirety (bad guys were allowed to succeed, even temporarily), and collected output of Vertigo (all of the above). The CCA had a nasty habit of losing the forest for the trees because they had The Rules, the first of which was that you couldn't break The Rules. Ever. I think we're better off on balance without the CCA.

Vertigo was around in the 90's last time I checked. Even with the CCA there were things like Demon In A Bottle, Speedy on smack, and Superman making a porn movie with Big Barda.

[Antiyonder]

Because most of these books are off shoot kiddie themed books and not part of the main line of books.

To be fair, while the Johnny DC Line is targeted towards kids specifically, Marvel Adventures are meant for the general audience.


Does it really sell that well?

Companies generally don't continue releasing particular products unless they bring in the money, so yes.


The fact is that kids are reading sequential art in school, but they aren't reading Spider-man, X-men, and Batman.

Sure, but the characters still have kid appeal in other mediums and products. It goes back to what's being said about the stories. The mainstream line takes itself so seriously to the point that it isn't fun, and the kid friendly/all ages titles are heavily marketed.

And while I can't explain why trades don't sell well, manga (which are sold in bookstores all around) tend to be more available than the single comic book magazines (which are sold in only comic stores, most of which are in locations deemed too far to travel).


Vertigo was around in the 90's last time I checked. Even with the CCA there were things like Demon In A Bottle, Speedy on smack, and Superman making a porn movie with Big Barda.

Sure, but Vertigo was always for the older readers, as opposed to the mainstream DC Comics which were usually for readers of all ages.

And while I can't say much in defense for the Superman/Barda porn, the events you've listed were honest attempts at doing human interest stories and handled in good taste. Were they good? Maybe, maybe not, but they certainly weren't cheap attempts at being edgy or mature.

[TheVileOne]

Well those examples were to cite how CCA didn't prevent certain types of stories from being told whereas Ed mentioned how if we still had the CCA we wouldn't have gotten some of the token good stories recently.

[IDistractedYou]

I do believe alot of the increased violence and such is more of a game of one upmanship between the two main comic companies. The aforementioned Spider-Man arc has the devouring been shown or was it a cliff hanger? I do know that a worker at my comic shop was very dissapointed that Spidey dropped the name of a recent superhero movie in his comic. (Spidey was his default recommendation for kids 8-12 but because of that he's not so sure.)

One has to remember things tend to swing like a pendulum culturally. In the 80s and mid 90s grim and gritty was big and everywhere. It swung back somewhat and the grit seemed to be defined to the smaller press comics like Image and such for a time. This decade comes around and the pendulum swings back. In another few years it will swing back in the other direction.

[Anthonynotes]

And there's a big problem with this thread in that "what's wrong with the comics industry" is basically just a "what's wrong with DC and Marvel" thread. It's myopic commentary at its best. When people talk about the "grim and gritty" movement in comics, what they really mean is superhero comics ONLY. The truth is there is plenty of stuff out there if you wrap your head around the idea that WOW, there are good comics outside of Marvel and DC's superheroes! Just because WE grew up with Spider-Man and Batman and Superman doesn't mean that today's kids have to. Today's kids are more familiar Naruto and Bleach and I for one have no problem with that. One of the most dismaying scenes in a comic store is when a parent tries to push Spider-Man and Batman comics onto their kids when they're more interested in Bongo or manga. Comics blogger (and manager of a local comics store up here in Toronto) wrote a bit about this:
http://comics212.net/2009/11/22/the-myth-of-all-ages/


Hmm, well, today's kids *do* like Superman, Batman and Spider-Man... they just like them as *animated* characters (or movie characters), which suits Time-Warner and (new owner) Disney just fine, since they only care about their respective comic companies for the new characters/plotlines they can generate for future films/TV shows.

Even if they sought out superhero comics, imagine they'd much rather go for the stuff that resembles the TV shows they watched (Batman: The Brave and the Bold) over the "real thing"... if the animated stuff was widely available outside of comic shops, that is (but I digress).

Still, as a previous poster noted, DC and Marvel also shot themselves in the foot by their exclusive focus on superheroes in the first place...considering they used to publish many other genres (teen humor, romance, funny animals, science-fiction, etc.). Of course, other companies easily satisfy said demands (as noted by the link above of the kids wanting Bongo, or companies like manga makers, Archie, etc.), but still seems unfortunate that DC/Marvel can't or won't consider seeing this shift in sales/interest and join in (say, DC reviving/updating one of its old titles like "Young Romance" or "Funny Stuff", or DC giving its CMX manga line more attention instead of *killing it* for unclear reasons).

[Leaping Larry Jojo]

No, see, I don't think they do. Nobody I think wants gratuitous sex and violence, they just want to continue enjoying the comics they grew up on. They want timeless Batman stories like those told in the Batman animated universe, but they want those stories applied to the main universe for THEIR characters (not a comic book published as a spin off for a TV show).



Sorry, you're wrong, unfortunately. :( I have first hand experience with fans who demand this "hardcore" stuff. They really get off on it. They may not be a vocal bunch, but I can attest to the fact that they do exist, and they are often the people you least suspect.

[Ed Liu]

Because most of these books are off shoot kiddie themed books and not part of the main line of books.
...
And why are they continuing to shut out and not target younger readers anymore?
So you're insisting that DC and Marvel are "continuing" to shut out younger readers while simultaneously dismissing all their books that are published specifically for that audience because "they don't matter." If you deliberately exclude everything they're doing to appeal to a target audience, it's pretty easy to conclude that they're ignoring the audience. This is what I mean when I'm saying that you're being pretty arbitrary in deciding what books matter or not.

You're right that manga is doing much better among younger readers than the younger reader/all-ages DC and Marvel titles are, but it's not because Marvel and DC is completely ignoring the audience and I don't think it's fair to make a blanket statement that they are.


I guess you are referring to the whole gimmick age metal foil covers, image era, bronze age and everything. No, I'm referring to superhero comics that fans say are too dark, too ugly, too violent, inappropriate for younger audiences, replacing good writing with sensationalism, and lionizing psychopathic superheroes that aren't any better than the villains they're supposed to be fighting. I've heard all these arguments about ten years ago. I made a lot of these arguments ten years ago. It's the exact same things being said again about the superhero comics today. Been there, done that, got the T-shirt, and it's not much more fun the second time around (and I can't really be the only person here old enough to remember all that as firsthand history, can I?). The good news is that they survived the last time we went through a grim-and-gritty phase. The bad news is that we have to deal with another object lesson in Santayana (http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/George_Santayana).

The fact that DC and Marvel are beginning to flood the market with multiple crossover books in their top franchises while ignoring the mid-list and starting in on "variant cover" nonsense is more evidence that they're repeating the history of the 90's again, but it's not what I was talking about. I was just talking about the content.


(say, DC reviving/updating one of its old titles like "Young Romance" or "Funny Stuff", or DC giving its CMX manga line more attention instead of *killing it* for unclear reasons).
The question is where would they revive Young Romance or Funny Stuff or any non-superhero title? They can't go to the direct market with them because nobody will buy them and they know it -- that market wants superheroes, and more specifically they want the icons. Nobody new need apply, and no new audience is going to seek out those marketplaces searching for something that's not superheroes. That leaves a sane, rational bookstore policy or a serious attempt to carve out a profitable space in digital publishing, and neither DC or Marvel seems to have any idea what they're doing in either. The books could be terrific (and there are lots of creators out there known to both companies who could do them), but it won't matter because they think (partly correctly) they have no avenues to distribute them.

As for CMX, if VIZ Media has to downsize 40% of their employees (http://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/book-news/comics/article/43145-viz-media-lays-off-60.html) when they absolutely own the manga bestseller charts, the manga publishing field is not as healthy as it might seem. CMX had a few decent licenses, but they didn't do themselves any favors when they censored/edited some of the books and a lot of their manga really seemed like the castoffs and leftovers that the big players left on the table. Like I said, DC really doesn't seem to have much of a clue on how to break into the bookstore market for books that are not titled Sandman and Watchmen.

[TheVileOne]

So you're insisting that DC and Marvel are "continuing" to shut out younger readers while simultaneously dismissing all their books that are published specifically for that audience because "they don't matter." If you deliberately exclude everything they're doing to appeal to a target audience, it's pretty easy to conclude that they're ignoring the audience. This is what I mean when I'm saying that you're being pretty arbitrary in deciding what books matter or not.

Yes because those aren't their main line of books. They are essentially fringe books for them.


You're right that manga is doing much better among younger readers than the younger reader/all-ages DC and Marvel titles are, but it's not because Marvel and DC is completely ignoring the audience and I don't think it's fair to make a blanket statement that they are.

Is it any less fair than accusing editorial and fandom of being racist for the recent changes in the superhero roster?


No, I'm referring to superhero comics that fans say are too dark, too ugly, too violent, inappropriate for younger audiences, replacing good writing with sensationalism, and lionizing psychopathic superheroes that aren't any better than the villains they're supposed to be fighting. I've heard all these arguments about ten years ago. I made a lot of these arguments ten years ago. It's the exact same things being said again about the superhero comics today. Been there, done that, got the T-shirt, and it's not much more fun the second time around (and I can't really be the only person here old enough to remember all that as firsthand history, can I?). The good news is that they survived the last time we went through a grim-and-gritty phase. The bad news is that we have to deal with another object lesson in Santayana (http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/George_Santayana).

I'm just incredibly frustrated when DC editorial comes out and credits 9/11 for being responsible for the direction comics have gone in. It's insulting, morbid, and rather disgusting. Your argument appears to be that we've been in this exact position before and we're here again. OK that's true, but just because this all happened before does not mean I have to be content and accept it because it happened before.

[Antiyonder]

Yes because those aren't their main line of books. They are essentially fringe books for them.

Doesn't matter. Sometimes if you (again, not you specifically) want something, you have to put your pride aside (choosing a good story over a mainstream line).

I'm aware that you yourself don't fall into that category, but most fans let their pride (wanting their cake and eating it too) and attachment to the character limit their chances of getting the stories they want.

And even then, comics like Booster Gold and Blue Beetle are part of the mainline.

[Anthonynotes]

The question is where would they revive Young Romance or Funny Stuff or any non-superhero title? They can't go to the direct market with them because nobody will buy them and they know it -- that market wants superheroes, and more specifically they want the icons. Nobody new need apply, and no new audience is going to seek out those marketplaces searching for something that's not superheroes. That leaves a sane, rational bookstore policy or a serious attempt to carve out a profitable space in digital publishing, and neither DC or Marvel seems to have any idea what they're doing in either. The books could be terrific (and there are lots of creators out there known to both companies who could do them), but it won't matter because they think (partly correctly) they have no avenues to distribute them.

As for CMX, if VIZ Media has to downsize 40% of their employees (http://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/book-news/comics/article/43145-viz-media-lays-off-60.html) when they absolutely own the manga bestseller charts, the manga publishing field is not as healthy as it might seem. CMX had a few decent licenses, but they didn't do themselves any favors when they censored/edited some of the books and a lot of their manga really seemed like the castoffs and leftovers that the big players left on the table. Like I said, DC really doesn't seem to have much of a clue on how to break into the bookstore market for books that are not titled Sandman and Watchmen.

If that's actually the case, sounds like they've painted themselves into quite a corner---only emphasizing one genre (superheroes, usually with a nasty tone) that only that appeals to a narrow group of fans (and not new ones) via comic book shops (vs. places the general public would actually go to, like supermarkets or bookstores). Doesn't seem healthy for the long-term survival as a company (the same group of fans can't keep shoveling out for expensive crossovers *forever*, if their numbers are slowly dwindling...).

While I know they have to stand on their own as comic companies (vs. relying on their corporate parents), wonder if Time-Warner should show *some* concern about the long-term future of their movie-and-TV-show-character/story-generation-subdivision (aka "DC Comics"). Then again, unlike their competition Disney, "synergy" (or "strong marketing") doesn't seem to ever have been in the vocabulary of Time-Warner (considering they've let their most famous set of cartoon characters---Looney Tunes---become virtually-unknown to today's grade-schoolers, among other things...).

Too bad... wondering what an updated "Young Romance" or "Funny Stuff" might've consisted of... :-p

-B.

[TheVileOne]

Doesn't matter. Sometimes if you (again, not you specifically) want something, you have to put your pride aside (choosing a good story over a mainstream line).

I'm aware that you yourself don't fall into that category, but most fans let their pride (wanting their cake and eating it too) and attachment to the character limit their chances of getting the stories they want.

And even then, comics like Booster Gold and Blue Beetle are part of the mainline.

Blue Beetle WAS part of the mainline.

[Antiyonder]

Blue Beetle WAS part of the mainline.

Regardless of the miswording, it was still part of the line which readers want, and thus they had no excuse not to pick it up. Both it and Booster Gold was and is the best of both worlds (mainstream and not excessive with the violence).

Now my point is that if the higher majority would buy copies of Booster Gold, then it would give DC the incentive to publish more titles that aren't so extreme or tone down the extreme content in their other titles.

Or look at the Spider-Man/Human Torch miniseries prior to OMD. Sure it was a miniseries, but it certainly takes place in the mainstream continuity (with the final issue set in the "then" present day), and again isn't a super dark story. Yet many of the readers clamouring for more uplifting stories didn't purchase the mini-series.

[Leaping Larry Jojo]

Too bad... wondering what an updated "Young Romance" or "Funny Stuff" might've consisted of... :-p

-B.

Marvel has released a few one-shot, lame-ass stabs at "updated" romance comics, but they inevitably are packaged in the stereotypical "suggestive" covers that appeal more to their core audience than females. The recent manga-style Mary Jane comics are the closest thing to "successful" female-targeted comics, but the inconsistent execution and the dreaded "2nd rate alternate universe" stigma probably didn't do it any favours.

I bet if Marvel properly promoted (not just drop a one-shot reprint once in a blue moon) and started reprinting Stan Lee and Dan DeCarlo's Millie the Model, old art and covers intact, they'd probably end up selling like gangbusters with young girls who are currently into Archie. Or maybe I just wish they'd release an Essential Millie the Model. ;) Heck, Dark Horse took a wild stab in the dark with Little Lulu and now it's one of their most popular series of books--they've been milking it to death the past 2 years--they've even started RE-REPRINTING their reprints that just started only 3 years ago!!!

[Ed Liu]

Yes because those aren't their main line of books. They are essentially fringe books for them.
If your argument is that they aren't calling enough attention to their all-ages/younger-reader-friendly line of comics, or that these comics aren't very good, or that they aren't successful with their target audience, that's one thing. It just seems to me that you're arguing that they don't matter because they aren't in continuity, which I may be mis-interpreting. If so, though, that just doesn't make sense to me, because that would mean The Dark Knight Returns can't matter either, since it was never in continuity or in DC's main line of books.

In any event, I think we're quibbling over semantics and missing the big picture, which I'll tackle in a second.

Is it any less fair than accusing editorial and fandom of being racist for the recent changes in the superhero roster? I'm assuming you're referring to comments over in this thread here (http://www.toonzone.net/forums/showthread.php?t=268024), but I've explained my reasoning in detail behind whatever statements I make. There is also repetition several times about the distinction between the non-judgmental "racist" I perceive vs. the judgmental "racist" which I (mostly) do not, which is important context that's not present in your statement here. If there is a flaw in my reasoning, I'd be happy to clarify more or adjust my opinion accordingly, but I haven't been presented with an argument yet to convince me that there is a flaw in my reasoning.

I never said anything about editorial in that thread, though, and am not calling them racist in either sense of the word. Most of the DC editors who are knocking off the non-white versions of iconic superheroes are the same editors who approved and edited the books with them in the first place, and they gave them a solid chance in the marketplace. Can't say anything about them other than that they approve some truly terrible stories, and that they may not be aware of the subtle messages they're sending, but I'm not calling them racists at all, and if others are, I don't agree with them.


Too bad... wondering what an updated "Young Romance" or "Funny Stuff" might've consisted of... :-p
Oni Press has put out quite a few rather good romance-oriented comics (I liked Love as a Foreign Language (http://www.onipress.com/display.php?type=bk&id=78) by Teen Titans Go! writer J.Torres and Three Days in Europe (http://www.onipress.com/display.php?type=bk&id=131)), and Image has True Story, Swear to God (http://www.tombeland.com/tb.asp), which has the benefit of being a true story (or at least an autobiographical one). For humor books, BOOM! has Muppet Show comics, but most of the others I know about are very much oriented towards the adult audience. We have updated Young Romance and Funny Stuff comics now. They're just not from DC or Marvel (Spider Man Loves Mary Jane excepted).

It occurred to me that there's an underlying assumption behind a lot of the discussion here, which is that the bulk of DC and Marvel's superhero comic book output SHOULD be aimed at or suitable for children. I don't think that's right, or necessary, for both historical reasons and philosophical ones. If you follow the history of comic book publishing (Comic Book Comics (http://www.eviltwincomics.com/cbc.html) is a nice place to get the summary of it, or Men of Tomorrow (http://www.amazon.com/Men-Tomorrow-Geeks-Gangsters-Birth/dp/0465036570/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1275315261&sr=8-1) if you want the juicy details in prose), it seems to me that the average age that the comic book companies, and DC and Marvel specifically, consistently got older as time goes on. The crime and horror books of the 1950's weren't aimed at the pre-teen set in the same way that the early adventures of DC Comics' books were. The establishment of the Comics Code Authority was purely based on the assumption of "comics == kids," but I think that assumption was increasingly wrong even at that point. By the 1970's, DC and Marvel began trying to push the envelope of the Comics Code Authority, telling stories that pass the letter of the law, but were definitely not aimed at the elementary school set. I can't believe that stuff like Doctor Strange: A Separate Reality (http://www.amazon.com/Doctor-Strange-Separate-Reality-TPB/dp/078510836X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1275315444&sr=8-1) or even stuff like the O'Neil/Adams and Englehart/Rogers noir Batman stories were aimed at anyone younger than high school. The CCA may have ensured that they were written in a way a 5-year old could understand, but I don't think they'd find them all that appealing.

The trend accelerates in the 1980's with The Dark Knight Returns and Watchmen, which really broke open the idea that superhero comics could be written for and read by adults, and accelerates through the grim-and-gritty 90's, when DC and Marvel seemed to morph from "(superhero) comics aren't just for kids" to "(superhero) comics aren't for kids at all." Things are definitely weighted towards the adult side from DC and Marvel now, but there are a non-trivial number of all-ages/younger readers books from both. Whether anybody is reading them is an open question, but if they're not, I don't think it is any reflection on the quality of the material.

The most common reason why people argue that superhero comics SHOULD be for kids is that Marvel and DC are scuttling their own potential audience. This is where it's important that we had this same discussion about 10-15 years ago. Back then, "comics aren't for kids any more." There are DC and Marvel comic book readers now who were not reading the books back then, and have started relatively recently, but they're high school or college-age. If Marvel and DC were scuttling their audience back then, where'd these new kids come from? By now, there should be NO younger readers of their product, but there are. If they're coming from cartoons on TV and big-screen adaptations, who cares? A comic book reader is a comic book reader. Are there not enough of them? Well, that's a distribution problem, not a content problem. There's lots of published material for adults that finds a sustainable audience.

Disney did not buy Marvel Entertainment to appeal to kids, or to push into publishing. They are more than capable of doing both on their own. Marvel is now part of the Disney empire to appeal to the teen-to-young-adult male audience. Disney, apparently, does NOT believe that superhero comics have to be for kids. There is nothing wrong with having a niche, and having a specific target audience is critical for a niche. Horror films are a niche in the world of film, but nobody anywhere is suggesting that we should be making horror films for kids because otherwise, adults won't want to watch horror films.

Finally, there's an even bigger unstated assumption behind "Marvel and DC superheroes should be for kids" that's worth challenging. The statement rests on the assumption that people can and should be reading Batman and Spider-Man throughout their lives. It's almost never said, but the idea is that a kid who reads Spider-Man at a young age will keep reading Spider-Man forever. How many books did you read as a 5-year old, a 10-year old, or even a 15-year old that you would still want to read as an adult in a non-ironic sense? How many book SERIES can do that for long? Superhero comics is the only genre that is expected to appeal to all audiences, forever, and that's a completely unreasonable expectation. In a way, what Marvel and DC are doing now is the ONLY way you can do that: with a separate publishing line that could still pass muster with the CCA, and then a newer line as the kids age into young adults and want more sophisticated fare.

So, if you are willing to dispense with the idea that superhero comics should be for kids, criticizing something like The Rise of Arsenal (or the lack of it, if the plot synopses are accurate :evil:) boils down to, "Gee, that's a really bad comic book." The rationales for the book may be bad, from "9/11 changed everything" to "kids like unmarried Spider-Man more," and bogus statements like that should be called bogus. However, even if those rationales were good, the comics would still suck.

So, yeah, "gee, that's a really bad comic book." Good thing I have lots of other comic books to choose from if I want better ones.

[ryandcow]

Is Booster Gold not mainstream? Because his book always sells out in the first 3 days or so in all 3 of my closest CB Shops. Maybe they don't buy a lot of issues or something....

[Anthonynotes]

Is Booster Gold not mainstream? Because his book always sells out in the first 3 days or so in all 3 of my closest CB Shops. Maybe they don't buy a lot of issues or something....

He's mainstream, but since he's not a character with a bat-insignia or S-shield, they probably don't order as many issues (or he's popular enough that what they do order sells out, though I suspect the former)...

Re: superhero comics are/aren't for kids: DCAU's all-ages approach (for the TV shows and comics based on it) seems like a positive way to go---appeal for kids, but still capable of a well-written, adult-appealing approach (a very strong one judging from the cult following it has among adult fans). Yes, there's plenty of other stuff for kids to read (superhero and otherwise, from DC/Marvel/elsewhere), but still wouldn't hurt for DC and Marvel to take tips from their competitors (or sidelines). Though in the DCAU's case, one reason for its strength might be a tighter control over its storytelling tone/what's allowed in its stories---not the (by now toothless) Comic Code Authority or similar censorship, but shock-value "Identity Crisis" type stuff kept at bay.

-B.

[Shawn Hopkins]

No, no, no. It's not based on the idea that superhero comics should be for kids, even though I think they'd be stupid to not keep making at least some for kids because kids really respond to the inherently childish power fantasies in them.

It's that even as an adult I don't want an outrageous snuff film aesthetic to dominate my reading material. It's creepy, it's sleazy, it makes the books it's in unreadable regardless of the talents of the people working on it.

And DC seems to be pushing for it because to a certain part of the audience shock sells. It's a kind of self-cannibalization, though. Anyone else ever, as a child, do terrible things to army men and action figures? You get a little spark of interest from taking your action figure, let's call him Speedy, and dragging him through torture and amputating his limbs and then setting him on fire and watching him burn, but what are you left with after that? You broke the toy.

When DC breaks its toys too much, it just pushes the cosmic reset button, but then they start right over again playing too rough.

Also, yeah, I was around for the dark cycle in the 90s. I was around for it in the 80s, too. And it was bad both times, but what I've noticed is that it gets stronger each time. They have to top themselves and make things more nasty and meaningless, I guess. Infinite Crisis is a worse and bloodier comic than Zero Hour and Zero Hour is worse than Crisis on Infinite Earths.

[Ed Liu]

Re: superhero comics are/aren't for kids: DCAU's all-ages approach (for the TV shows and comics based on it) seems like a positive way to go---appeal for kids, but still capable of a well-written, adult-appealing approach (a very strong one judging from the cult following it has among adult fans).
I think the biggest difference between your opinion and mine on this is that you seem to be creating more of a separation between the TV cartoons and the comics, while I don't. I don't think DC and Marvel have to do the all-ages thing in print because I think they're already doing a pretty good job of that in the TV shows. It doesn't matter to me that DC and Marvel aren't pushing all-ages/younger-ages material in print because DC and Marvel are already pushing that material in other media. I'd like kids to read, and I'll admit that there are problems with fewer kids reading as a pleasure activity today, but I don't think that an influx of superhero comic book material written for and made available to kids is going to change that trend.

As a side note, the DC and Marvel superheroes seem to be some of the very few fictional characters malleable enough to appeal to entirely different age groups for entirely different reasons. The only other ones I can think of off the top of my head are Tarzan and Sherlock Holmes. I'm sure there's something interesting to say about that, though this probably isn't the time or place.


It's that even as an adult I don't want an outrageous snuff film aesthetic to dominate my reading material. It's creepy, it's sleazy, it makes the books it's in unreadable regardless of the talents of the people working on it.
The simplest solution would be to stop reading. I read the pockets of the DC and Marvel output that still hold my interest, which means I end up self-selecting this kind of aesthetic (for lack of a better term) out of my reading material. It's the comic book version of, "If you don't like what's on TV, turn it off or change the channel."

If DC and Marvel insist on gritting up their superheroes, all they accomplish is convincing me that the Super-Guy in print now is not the same Super-Guy that I like, so who cares what they do to him? That's not my guy. After a certain point, it doesn't matter what George Lucas does to screw up Star Wars or M. Night Shyamalan does to screw up the live-action Avatar the Last Airbender movie. Those ain't the characters I know and love any more. They just have the same names.

I also think that books like Darwyn Cooke's Parker or Ed Brubaker and Sean Phillips' Incognito have as much dark, ugly human dysfunction on display as Rise of Arsenal, and Watchmen was pioneering superheroics as a substitute/stand-in for sex almost 30 years ago (and I swear I thought of that before reading what Chris Sims had to say about this comic (http://www.comicsalliance.com/2010/06/01/rise-of-arsenal-justice-league-worst/)). While it may make reading those books uncomfortable, I wouldn't call them "unreadable," and I would go further and say that those books would be significantly worse, if not impossible, to do without that kind of ugliness on display. As I said, it's not the element of darkness or ugliness that is the turn-off to me. To pick an example of an old property getting grim-and-grittified, Alan Moore made Swamp Thing a much darker, nastier comic than the comics by Len Wein and Bernie Wrightson, and Frank Miller made Batman much darker, uglier, and nastier than he had been in the past. The difference is that those comics didn't suck. The darker elements of Rise of Arsenal seem a lot less important than the fact that it's just really, really bad.

The fact that it's so bad that I can point and laugh at it is also probably why I can't find myself too worked up over this latest iteration of "superheroes are getting too dark." I also don't think it's quite as endemic as it was before, although I can see the argument of wanting to stop it now before it does spread everywhere.

[Antiyonder]

I also think that books like Darwyn Cooke's Parker or Ed Brubaker and Sean Phillips' Incognito have as much dark, ugly human dysfunction on display as Rise of Arsenal, and Watchmen was pioneering superheroics as a substitute/stand-in for sex almost 30 years ago (and I swear I thought of that before reading what Chris Sims had to say about this comic (http://www.comicsalliance.com/2010/06/01/rise-of-arsenal-justice-league-worst/)). While it may make reading those books uncomfortable, I wouldn't call them "unreadable," and I would go further and say that those books would be significantly worse, if not impossible, to do without that kind of ugliness on display. As I said, it's not the element of darkness or ugliness that is the turn-off to me. To pick an example of an old property getting grim-and-grittified, Alan Moore made Swamp Thing a much darker, nastier comic than the comics by Len Wein and Bernie Wrightson, and Frank Miller made Batman much darker, uglier, and nastier than he had been in the past. The difference is that those comics didn't suck. The darker elements of Rise of Arsenal seem a lot less important than the fact that it's just really, really bad.

There's more to it that. Comics like the Watchmen are more about telling a story. The content isn't used in a lame attempt to seem mature.

To make an analogy, there are plenty of kids/teens that will speak with excessive profanity. They do it so that they can feel mature, when in reality they only end up looking immature.

And that's the issue of this thread. Superhero comics for the most part are actually like insecure kids/teens that are desperate to prove "Look at us. We're mature."

Stories like The Watchmen, The Dark Knight Returns, even the SLG Gargoyles comics (which have more freedom content wise) don't have to convince the reader of their maturity. They are mature, and they are secure with themselves in that regard.

[reddiOx]

I don't really understand where this thread has gone. From my understanding, it was originally meant to show various specific examples of where comics have gone bad. It's degenerated into massive whining about how comics are too dark in general on the basis of a terrible example. Using the Rise of Arsenal is an example is especially bad, since it's not representative of all comics. Every single person I've talked to (online or in real life) has hated that issue. General consensus is that it was probably one of the worst DC titles to come out in recent times.

And all of this about all of the mainstream comics being too dark or being dark purely for shock value is also untrue. Have any of you read the new Flash series? It's been refreshingly light - even featuring a scene where Barry Allen rebuilds an apartment building for some people whose building got destroyed by some villains. (more or less) I'm pretty sure that Flash is fairly mainstream as well. And while Blackest Night was admittedly a bit dark, it was centered on emotion and death, and that kind of comes with the territory. Return of Bruce Wayne has been great so far as well. Some series are unnecessarily dark, yes, but I wouldn't say that all of them are, or even the majority.

I'd say in general, this thread is one of those "good ol' days" things. Your nostalgia is clouding your judgement.

Edit: Oh, and if you want to read anything that has real unnecessary amounts of shock value, read any of the recent non-mainstream stuff Mark Millar has done. Wanted, Kick-Ass, even his newest, Nemesis. (well, not mainstream compared to Batman and Superman. His stuff has been pretty popular lately.) Compared to those, DC and Marvel still have a ways to go in terms of shock value. So please, stop whining. Or get some cheese to go with it.

[Shawn Hopkins]

I've wanted to do a thread for a while that will serve as sort of a museum of some of the sick, dark stuff that we've seen in superhero comics in recent years. The title refers to the fascination the comics companies have with these kinds of things, I'm not being so hyperbolic as to say that simply putting these things in comics is an atrocity. Rather, that comic book editors have decided they need atrocities to keep interest in their books. We can talk about these things, what we think about them, and what the reasons for them are.

So, where to begin? I suppose we'll just get one of the bigger elephants in the room out of the way first, the rape and murder of Sue Dibny in Identity Crisis, a character who up until this point had been confined to light-hearted Nick and Nora Charles banter with her husband, a guy who stretches because he drinks special soda pop.

http://goodcomics.comicbookresources.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/dcmoment70a.jpg


http://goodcomics.comicbookresources.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/dcmoment70b.jpg

http://goodcomics.comicbookresources.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/dcmoment65b.jpg

This comic is the comic that has made me the angriest out of any I have read in the last decade or so. Because in the end it's all so pointless, the rape doesn't happen so the writers can explore something interesting or say something about rape. It happens so they can rehabilitate the Dr. Light character and make him a "really bad" bad guy again. And so they can motivate the heroes to do bad things. As a topper, this light-hearted character gets refrigeratored -twice- in this story, because if she has been raped she's no longer clean so they might as well kill as a motive to make Elongated Man emo and to kick off their murder mystery. To top that, in the most contrived reveal I've read, and I've read Cary Bates Superman, they manage to bring another superhero girlfriend down with her when we find out that Jean Loring killed Sue because she's a crazy, insecure witch who thought a murder might help her get back together with her man. Oh, and Sue was pregnant, too, just as a topper and to remind you that, hey, we killed a woman here.

At this point you may be thinking that I'm being unfair to DC comics. That they couldn't be that cynical. Well, you need to read this:

http://occasionalsuperheroine.blogspot.com/2006/11/goodbye-to-comics-7-we-need-rape-my.html

“We Need A Rape”

My theoretical comic company, which, for the theoretical purposes of my theoretical memoir, I’ll call Gilgongo! Comix, was tired of being “pushed around” in the sales wars and in the court of fanboy opinion (such as it was). So with all the red-nosed gumption and determination of Ralphie from “A Christmas Story” Gilgongo! Comix decided to go badass.

They needed a rape. Because there’s nothing quite so badass as rape, lets face it. And the victim couldn’t been from the usual suspects: “The Black Raven” (done that already plus ovaries ripped out), “Bondage Queen” (wasn’t she raped like every issue--at least mentally?), “Demon-Girl” (she was already paralyzed from the last pseudo-raping and that provided all sorts of logistical nightmares for the artist).

No, they had to find the most innocent, virginal, good-natured “nice” character they could find and ravage her not once but twice.

Theoretically, this character’s name was Vicki Victim.

A whole groundbreaking limited series would be built around Vicki Victim’s rape and murder.

This made me nervous. In the office, I was known as being innocent, virginal, good-natured, and “nice”. I was kidded on it on a regular basis, as well as being told it was exactly those qualities that were “holding me back.”

Of course, it was silly to identify with a dumb old comic character.

Vicki Victim’s fate was sealed in a Gilgongo! Comics confab in which we explored how we could change our comics to be more “badass.” It was decided that the reason we were trailing in sales was because we were “too good-natured and nice.” This would have to stop. Our books needed a grittier edge. We needed a grittier edge.

So our books changed. There was rape, and murder, torture, death, and mutiliation. Superheroes did amoral or outright evil things and the line between good and bad was blurred.

And you know what?

Our sales improved. And this is a fact.

But it all started with Vicki Victim, and she has to be given credit.

Thin disguises aside, Vicki Victim is Sue Dibny. Valerie D'Orazio used to be an editor at DC.

All right, that was cheery, wasn't it? Let me know what you think and I'll post more soon, I've got lots of material.

[Bloody Marquis]

This is why Identity Crisis isn't on my shelf. When I first heard about it, I thought "Hey, a murder mystery featuring the Justice League! And it has an introduction by Joss Whedon! This might be awesome!" A skim-through later, I felt disgusted.

Good analysis. Maybe you can write about Kevin Smith's recent stint on Batman.

[Antiyonder]

“We Need A Rape”

My theoretical comic company, which, for the theoretical purposes of my theoretical memoir, I’ll call Gilgongo! Comix, was tired of being “pushed around” in the sales wars and in the court of fanboy opinion (such as it was). So with all the red-nosed gumption and determination of Ralphie from “A Christmas Story” Gilgongo! Comix decided to go badass.

They needed a rape. Because there’s nothing quite so badass as rape, lets face it. And the victim couldn’t been from the usual suspects: “The Black Raven” (done that already plus ovaries ripped out), “Bondage Queen” (wasn’t she raped like every issue--at least mentally?), “Demon-Girl” (she was already paralyzed from the last pseudo-raping and that provided all sorts of logistical nightmares for the artist).

No, they had to find the most innocent, virginal, good-natured “nice” character they could find and ravage her not once but twice.

Theoretically, this character’s name was Vicki Victim.

A whole groundbreaking limited series would be built around Vicki Victim’s rape and murder.

This made me nervous. In the office, I was known as being innocent, virginal, good-natured, and “nice”. I was kidded on it on a regular basis, as well as being told it was exactly those qualities that were “holding me back.”

Of course, it was silly to identify with a dumb old comic character.

Vicki Victim’s fate was sealed in a Gilgongo! Comics confab in which we explored how we could change our comics to be more “badass.” It was decided that the reason we were trailing in sales was because we were “too good-natured and nice.” This would have to stop. Our books needed a grittier edge. We needed a grittier edge.

So our books changed. There was rape, and murder, torture, death, and mutiliation. Superheroes did amoral or outright evil things and the line between good and bad was blurred.

And you know what?

Our sales improved. And this is a fact.

But it all started with Vicki Victim, and she has to be given credit.

Thin disguises aside, Vicki Victim is Sue Dibny. Valerie D'Orazio used to be an editor at DC.

All right, that was cheery, wasn't it? Let me know what you think and I'll post more soon, I've got lots of material.

I definitely side with your opinion on this. And yes, rape doesn't have to be a bad thing if used well and not as a cheap attempt at attention. Sadly, this blogger has a point.

As I've stated before, whether it was mainstream (Blue Beetle, Booster Gold, She-Hulk), an alternate continuum (DCAU books, Johnny DC, Marvel Adventures, Spider-Girl) or other company books (Archie, Uncle Scrooge, Love & Capes), people keep buying the title that go for edginess and the so called mature storytelling.

As I've stressed before, the comic book medium is one that you (Not you specifically of course) literally have to vote with your wallet to achieve the desired results.

There are several reasons for that as I'm going to restate:

1. Insecurity: In truth buying a comic book with excessive gore and sex for the sake of looking mature makes it hard for people to respect you. But just the same, some people still operate on the mentality that reading a comic with rape and murder will make them look more dignified that a comic where Spider-Man uses some Hostess Pies substitutes to stop the Red Ghost's Apes.

2. Misplaced love: Some comic book fans no matter how good a story they want, in the end will place a greater importance in purchasing their favorite title or characters. It's why they will continue to support a mainstream DC title even if they are turned off by the gore and sex, despite comics like JLU and Batman The Brave and The Bold offering alternatives, or ignore titles like The Flash, Booster Gold, Blue Beetle and She-Hulk (Dan Slott's by the way).

Or in this case, when buying a miniseries, they choose to continue buying after the bombshell has been dropped, rather than simply dropping the miniseries. I imagine that if the remainder of the miniseries didn't sell so well, that we'd be reading a much different blog.

3. Misinformed method: And then we have people who will boycott Marvel and most importantly DC because they are turned off by the topic at hand. But boycotting will only convey that you don't want their comics anymore. The only way to convey the message that you want comics that are more uplifting and not dependant on rape & murder is to again seek out the titles that have what you are looking for in a story.


Now at this point, I believe that there is indeed an audience for more good natured stories or stories with tact and talent as:

- Booster Gold currently seems to be doing well enough to stay in publication.
- Darkwing Duck comic has sold well and elevated from a mini-series to an ongoing one.
- Love & Capes once it resumes from what I've been told will become a monthly.
- Archie continues to be the only comic to get exposure in outside of the comic book stores.

The only solution (which would still take a while to accomplish anything) would be to continue supporting the titles I've list, or titles in a similar vein, and if you already support the comics which are lighter or just use tact, then recommend these titles to anyone else who shares our complaint (and express interest in exploring new titles).

If these titles were to sell like crazy, then frankly the people at DC might just have to consider their stance on excessive rape. Hence the phrase voting with your wallet.

[Wolf Boy2]

I'm gonna be cynical and wonder if these writers have ever loved a woman in their lives. Because that's a scenario so horrifying, I wouldn't even want to read it let alone write it. :sad:

[Jacob T. Paschal]

Ah, I remember reading Identity Crisis. I'll come clean and admit I liked the story. It was a dark, brutal, and a balance-throwing curve ball. I agree that they could've gone deeper with the aftermath of the rape but that would've probably detracted from the more general 'League-based focus' of the story. I'd argue that a lack of detail makes it more terrifying. Something sick and dark happened that our minds could only imagine. Seriously, could you imagine the dialogue during the devious deed? Not pretty stuff...which I'd assume is the point of the entire ordeal. :ack:

As for the League's reaction...well, I could say one of two things. They wanted to make the pain go away for their friends, which shows compassion for one's fellows. My vote would've gone to just killing Dr. Light and claiming it was in battle. :sweat: I suppose there is an argument to be made that it's unrealistic one of them didn't kill him, too. :sweat:

[Angilasman]

I'd just like to point out that Usagi Yojimbo, a comic with damn funny animals, has featured pretty much every kind of human depravity imaginable (murder, forced prostitution, mutilation, every kind of betrayal, ect.), but has done it in such a intelligent, non-explotative manner that any story could still be read by 12 or 11 year old kids and - far from being something you'd sheild your kid from, you might want them to read it to be educated.

Sorry to digress, but whenever I read Usagi I want to go to the people in charge of Marvel or DC and shove their faces in whatever page I'm reading and scream "There! That's how you make a comic book you dumb *@**)($@!^#s!"

[Bloody Marquis]

I remember skimming through an issue of The Boys that made fun of how rape stories were badly shoehorned in. And you know there's something wrong when Garth Ennis of all people is complaining about how tasteless something is.

[Jin Kazama]

I merged your new thread with your old one, as they both basically cover the exact same thing.

[Peter Paltridge]

http://occasionalsuperheroine.blogspot.com/2006/11/goodbye-to-comics-7-we-need-rape-my.html

“We Need A Rape”

Thin disguises aside, Vicki Victim is Sue Dibny. Valerie D'Orazio used to be an editor at DC.

All right, that was cheery, wasn't it? Let me know what you think and I'll post more soon, I've got lots of material.
That made me so angry I had to walk off and cool down before I came back to post this. I hope it's an exaggeration, because she makes DC collectively sound like a machine full of cruel monsters who would approve of an actual rape if it meant three more readers than last month.

[Antiyonder]

That made me so angry I had to walk off and cool down before I came back to post this. I hope it's an exaggeration, because she makes DC collectively sound like a machine full of cruel monsters who would approve of an actual rape if it meant three more readers than last month.

Considering that the sales of IC was high, as much as I disagree with the reasoning, she has grounds to believe her assumption correct.

[Invidente 7]

I disagree. Identity Crisis is truly awful and the final reveal makes all of it pointless. I was into it and following the mystery and wondering what the deep motive for it was. Oh wait, she just did it cause she's crazy! No real reason that makes a lick of sense! Well, isn't that a kick in the nuts.

No, Identiy crisis is still decent, the part that you don't obviously get ,because you live in such a *safe* world, is that there are too many sick people outhere who perform the worst atrocities out of boredom or for no reason at all and the whole point of Identity Crisis is that all it takes to destroy a perfectly good plan is a element OUT of the plan, like for example in The Warriors Cyrus had the right idea

...

but he didn't count on a crazy out of control jackal like Luther to kill him out of mere randomness :shrug:

and she didn't do it out of crazyness, she did to earn her husband's attention, which was flat out explained in the climax, and it was something the superheroes could not suspect :radda:

[suss2it]

and she didn't do it out of crazyness, she did to earn her husband's attentionThat seems pretty damn crazy to me.

[Shawn Hopkins]

I don't live in a "safe" world, I grew up in the meanest, poorest part of Appalachia, and only escaped it to get a job writing about crime and murder and, yep, rape. I've seen rape victims cry on the witness stand and stood over dead bodies. And on one memorable occasion a fifth of a dead body. And that's just professional stuff, to say nothing of personal tragedy. If my world was supposed to have been safe, I deserve a do-over.

Stories about rape and murder can be great stories, but Identity Crisis, is not a story about rape and murder. It's a story that uses rape and murder to be "badass" and to motivate so-called "heroes" to do bad things. It's not interested it as anything except a springboard for male superhero action. And Jean Loring's motivation was nothing more than crazy. Killing people to get your husband to come back to you when you could have just picked up the phone is crazy, all there is to it. There's six issues of mystery and the final motive is "she did it, because she's crazy."

[Dantheman]

I think Identity Crisis' biggest sin was that it was a crossover storyline with rape and murder involving the Justice League, at the same time a Justice League cartoon was on the air on Cartoon Network.

Heaven knows how many kids were :confused: when Identity Crisis was their first comic book, after seeing the cartoon.

(Not that I condone such things at any other time, mind you. Identity Crisis would've sucked even if there wasn't a JL cartoon on the air)

[Ed Liu]

I don't have a problem that Identity Crisis went dark. Alan Moore went much, much darker almost 20 years earlier in his Swamp Thing stories, which were awesome. My problem with Identity Crisis was that it sucked very badly, and I can explain exactly why because the first 2 or 3 pages neatly encapsulate every single thing about the comic that sucks (http://www.toonzone.net/forums/showpost.php?p=3161582&postcount=38). The fact that the reasons for it sucked even worse than the story just makes it worse, but it would still have been a rotten comic book even if the motivations had been absolutely, unquestionably sterling.

[ryandcow]

I don't understand how you can interchange the unmarried Firehawk or whatever the lady's name is, with Ralph Dinby's talk about how he loves his wife and how he met her. The dialouge wasn't fantastic, but it wasn't 50's JL bad where you can literally cut and paste what they say every single phrase.

[Ed Liu]

I don't understand how you can interchange the unmarried Firehawk or whatever the lady's name is, with Ralph Dinby's talk about how he loves his wife and how he met her. The dialouge wasn't fantastic, but it wasn't 50's JL bad where you can literally cut and paste what they say every single phrase.
Not to drift too far off-topic, but there's one part where I specifically remember reading a panel and asking, "Wait, who's saying what here?" before realizing (to my growing annoyance) that it didn't even really matter. It was just more exposition dump carelessly written, which (to me) is the kind of sloppiness that I find throughout the whole series. I'll see if I can find the panel, since I remember that I scanned it with the intent of posting it here as part of a massive, "This is why Identity Crisis sucks" takedown.

[GWOtaku]

Darwyn Cooke recently made some comments (http://tinyurl.com/24ms5af) relating to the issues that this thread brings up that I think are pretty much right on the mark (do note there's censored language in the video that would be censored at TZ also). The issue the thread covers is of course more broad than the so-called "catering to perverted needs of forty-five year old men" that Cooke bashes, but the larger principle he gets to at the end fully fits. Just looking at the latest awful example that Shawn posted last page...you really do wonder just who so many "mainstream" comic books are being written for these days. When creativity is limited to finding new ways to do horrible things to or with established characters......

There should obviously be room for variety in comics, but when darkness is a crutch I think it's understandably frustrating. It can be just as cliche and hackneyed as anything else, and to make matters worse it's alienating on top of that. How many people would honestly and unironically give someone Identity Crisis to introduce them to comics, or that Spidey comic w/ the Lizard referenced on the first page?

[Anthonynotes]

Agree with what the others here have said---Identity Crisis sums up everything wrong with the "grim and gritty" style of comics, and similar tone part of why I "vote with my wallet" and stick with the non-mainstream DC stuff (Johnny DC and Showcase reprints), along with Archie/Uncle Scrooge/Love and Capes. Along with other comics, including comic strips (ranging from Get Fuzzy to Dykes to Watch Out For). While my job isn't as grim as Shawn's above, I do follow plenty of politics/current events; if I want to see one-note crazed killer clowns trying to slaughter a population the size of Texas, I can watch the evening news (which is way scarier/more realistic than anything the Joker, etc. could do)...

Stuff like IC makes me see why mainstream media/the general public takes such a dim view of comics fans as "30 year olds living in their parents' basements with zero social skills/view women as an alien species"... since if it were a TV show, movie, book, or anything else, the people who proposed IC would be laughed out of the room...

-B.

[Shawn Hopkins]

Hi. Everybody have a good, wholesomely non-violent Memorial Day weekend? Good, good. Keep those happy thoughts in mind, because I've got some more pointless superhero gore for you.

I have to point something out here. I'm not against violent comics. I've got more Punisher comics than you can shake a bloody stick at. I'm a big fan of horror comics. Comic books are a big medium and that kind of thing has its place. I don't even mind it in some superhero comics, you know, if Captain Deathkill and Commander Killdeath are going at it in a butterknife duel to the death, that's okay with me. I found some massively violent Punisher scans where Daken makes the Punisher into a much more modular version, but I won't post them here because that's not what I have a problem with.

No, I just don't like it when unnecessary gore is inserted into traditional superhero stories for shock value, or to make something that would otherwise be light-hearted and silly "dark" or "badass." I don't like traditional superhero comics that, as Mr. Cooke said in that video GWOtaku posted, "cater to the perverted desires of 45-year-old men."

Okay, that out of the way, here's an example of what he was talking about. Superboy Prime was a very innocent character that appeared in Crisis on Infinite Earths. He's basically a kid from a copy of "our" Earth, Earth Prime, where Superman is a comics character and he's one of only a couple of superheroes there. It's pretty easy to see Superboy Prime as a stand-in for the average comics reader in the 1980s, young, a little naive and inexperienced but a good kid with a lot of potential. It's a positive portrayal of a comic fan from DC, though.

Fastforward 20 years, though ...

http://i473.photobucket.com/albums/rr94/shawnbuddy/dcmoment51.jpg

Now Superboy Prime is still sort of youthful and naive, but it's just that he doesn't get this aggressive new DC Universe. He's the comic fan as the clueless, socially awkward, backwards, entitled geek, apparently how DC sees us now. I always felt DC used him a vehicle to take a shot at fanboys who didn't like their new dark and badass direction, with his pathetic cries of "You're ruining me" while dismembering the D-list.

And dismembering the D-list is something that DC and to a lesser extent Marvel does well. Like I said, I don't care if Mr. Death and Mr. Kill go at it in a bloody battle royale in a certain kind of book, but modern superhero comics have a tendency to grab some poor lighthearted schmo from the D-list who won't be missed that much and kill or mutilate them so an "event" book can have a splash of blood to get the fanboys excited. They're not even cannon fodder, they're more like sacrifices to pump up sales.

See that lady up there getting her head splashed. Her name is Pantha (http://www.titanstower.com/source/whoswho/pantha.html). Bet she's an ultraviolent badass who knew the risks and just came in from her grim and gritty comic for an ending she can be proud of, right?

Well, not exactly.

http://i473.photobucket.com/albums/rr94/shawnbuddy/panthababy.jpg

Pantha spent most of her career playing reluctant "mother" to Baby (http://www.titanstower.com/source/whoswho/babywilde.html), a superstrong genetically engineered monster that could juggle trucks and had the brain of a three-year-old. So having her head knocked off while Baby watches it roll around and leave a bloody streak is not exactly what you'd expect to happen to her.

Don't worry. Superboy Prime didn't leave Baby an orphan for long.

http://i473.photobucket.com/albums/rr94/shawnbuddy/IC4deathwilde.jpg

Once you kill two D-list characters, of course, it's hard to stop, so it was pretty bad for Bushido (http://www.titanstower.com/source/whoswho/bushido.html) that he happened to show up about that time.

http://i473.photobucket.com/albums/rr94/shawnbuddy/bushidotitan.jpg

As far as I can tell Bushido has been in a grand total of four comics, including this one and the issue of Titans that features the same events as this one, and was only a member of Titans LA making him a good candidate for most obscure Titan ever. Perfect for this purpose.

http://i473.photobucket.com/albums/rr94/shawnbuddy/IC4deathbushido.jpg

And also Risk (http://www.titanstower.com/source/whoswho/risk.html). Risk was in the unpopular Dan Jurgens Teen Titans revival where a de-aged Atom lead the team and most of it turned out to be descended from space aliens. His powers are barely worth mentioning, but he has good hair.

http://i473.photobucket.com/albums/rr94/shawnbuddy/risk.jpg

So of course he's among the first wave of defense against a guy who is strong as Superman.

http://i473.photobucket.com/albums/rr94/shawnbuddy/IC4riskarm.jpg

Risk might actually get it worse than any of the rest of them. Instead of dying he just gets all grim and angry over losing his right arm and becomes a villain, but mostly he's turned into a particularly unfunny joke. Here's the punchline, which happens the next time he meets Superboy Prime.

http://i473.photobucket.com/albums/rr94/shawnbuddy/riskrightarm.jpg


There goes the other one. Some of the superheroes watching actually kind of look like they like it.

So that's it, then. Since Crisis on Infinite Earths these kind of events always need to "raise the stakes" by killing off a few characters, even if the deaths are meaningless and the characters being killed are obscure, old-fashioned, lighthearted characters who don't fit into these kind of stories at all. They've got to get that blood flowing because, sadly, that's what a lot of us seem to want in our big events. What do you think of this practice? What D-list deaths did you think were unnecessary or gratuitous?

[Jacob T. Paschal]

I really liked that scene in the book. I pretty much had no clue who any of the heroes were...but that wasn't really the point. All we needed to know was that they were heroes trying to stop the out of control Superboy-Prime. They were fodder and were treated as such. The graphic violence (coupled with his dialogue decrying how "they were making him a monster" or some such) is the real focus there. From my own point of view (and bias as a younger reader)...it was pretty awesome. I didn't grow up on comics. I grew up on the DCAU in the nineties of course, but I never felt any moral or tight emotional obligation to superheroes. They were flawed but well meaning soliders in the war on crime and their lives were there for our viewing enjoyment. That said, I respect the rich flavor of the varying generations. Infinite Crisis told a story of the generational gaps converging. The flawed and sometimes corrupt heroes of today clashing against what I (a biased youth of but twenty) see as a romantic past in which things were a little more black and white. The simplicity of such, when met with the chaotic spectrum of multiple colors, is corrupted. Black and white become something different, something more when met with the red of blood and the green of money.

But again, I'm twenty so I can't say I'm really insulted by such. As a writer I believe in writing the things you find most interesting and then tackling it with your full focus.

[Radical Raven]

I really liked Infinite Crisis, but I have to admit that that scene is pretty weak. The story as a whole is a lot less brutal then, say, Identity Crisis, so these few ridiculously bloody pages really stuck out and made me wince. I understad they needed to make Superboy Prime's whole shtick more obvious, but really, they couldn't have just waited until he

killed Superman? .

It also doesn't help that, in some parts, that scene is downright over the top and silly-looking. That bit where he's staring at his hands after punching out Pantha is ridiculous.

On the other hand, considering the content of the story, is it possible that they were trying to make.. some sort of point about modern, super--violent comics here?

[Mister Intensity]

Funny how Archie Comics is releasing the most mature mainstream comic books out of all the mainstream comic companies with the Life with Archie books.

[Anthonynotes]

Yes, Shawn nicely summed up most of what was wrong with Infinite Crisis (and Superboy-Prime's modern treatment, which still feels "out of character" vs his original persona to me), particularly the shock-value gore involved, whether or not they're minor characters.

While he was a villain in this series as well (also acting out-of-character vs his original appearance and gimmick of being a "good version of Luthor"), wonder if Alex Luthor should be included also for the "pointless death" side of things (since the Joker shows up for *one* panel out of this *entire* series... just to kill Alex Luthor? Which goes into why I dislike the modern comics' Joker, as a one-note killing machine, but I digress...).

I'll also throw in what's happened to a few of the gay characters in comics, namely:
-Tasmanian Devil: minor DC hero and Global Guardian, recently skinned alive and turned into a rug by the villain Prometheus (in that "Cry For Justice" series apparently).

- Marvel's character "Freedom Ring" (a rookie hero) is killed via multiple spikes through his body (including his groin IIRC) by some villain.

Yeah, compared to stuff like the above, Archie seems more realistic, oddly enough (even with the occasioanl aliens/monsters/Sabrina's side of things about). Least the worst thing that'll happen to Kevin Keller is he'll fade into the background or move from Riverdale...

-B.

[Kolbar]

I'd also add massacring the original Freedom Fighters in Infinite Crisis #1 fits well into what you're saying. Although some of them survived, they freaking strung Phantom Lady, Human Bomb, and Black Condor's corpses up on the Washington Monument. Great way to kick off your mega event with the brutal graphic deaths of patriotic superheroes only then to have new "darker" and "badass" versions of them pop up several months later in their own miniseries and now ongoing series.

[Shawn Hopkins]

I'd also add massacring the original Freedom Fighters in Infinite Crisis #1 fits well into what you're saying. Although some of them survived, they freaking strung Phantom Lady, Human Bomb, and Black Condor's corpses up on the Washington Monument. Great way to kick off your mega event with the brutal graphic deaths of patriotic superheroes only then to have new "darker" and "badass" versions of them pop up several months later in their own miniseries and now ongoing series.

The death of Phantom Lady was especially yucky because by putting the focus on her cleavage they seemed to be aiming at sexual titillation at the same time as "ooh, blood."

http://www.captionbox.net/eeb/images/eeb_shots/infinitecrisis1_21lo.jpg

[Kolbar]

The death of Phantom Lady was especially yucky because by putting the focus on her cleavage they seemed to be aiming at sexual titillation at the same time as "ooh, blood."


Totally forgot about that, but it's just more fuel on the fire. Also, similarly, how about Blue Beetle Ted Kord's unnecessary death in "Countdown to Infinite Crisis." True, he died as a real hero and helped to uncover a massive conspiracy that even Batman didn't realize existed, possibly making him DC's greatest detective, and then they blow his brains out. I think his death also plays into the idea of characters who seem "outdated" or "lame" to some people and then we got the hipper Jaime Reyes (who is not a bad character at all; there could definitely have been room for 2 Beetles and a lot more story possibilities), even though it seems a lot of people (myself included) are big Ted Kord fans.

And on the Marvel front, am I wrong or has no one yet mentioned "Ultimatum" and the travesty that book was in the way it decimated the Ultimate universe. I wouldn't have had a problem if they were going to destroy the Ultimate U and start over from scratch and did this, but I just don't get what the point of offing all these characters when the point of the universe's existence in the first place was to be able to utilize every character living or dead without the baggage they come with.

[ryandcow]

Totally forgot about that, but it's just more fuel on the fire. Also, similarly, how about Blue Beetle Ted Kord's unnecessary death in "Countdown to Infinite Crisis."
What's worse is that Didio said in response to a question about why they made Ted Kord cool again, if they were just going to kill him (after Didio previously admitted to having planned to kill Kord in IC way before Infinite Crisis came out.) Didio said something like "We made him a good hero again so his death would have a bigger emotional impact on the fans." That's kind of horrible.

[Antiyonder]

Now as I've said before, the reason why adult content like rape is misused frequently is to cash in on what sells. And that means the reader either:

1. Puts their money behind the comic.
2. Boycotting comics rather than pursuing titles which do not contain said problems.

Case in point, the link that Shawn gave us (http://occasionalsuperheroine.blogspot.com/2006/11/goodbye-to-comics-7-we-need-rape-my.html) contains a troublesome response by Blakeney:


I used to be an avid Marvel and occassional DC reader but grew steadily disgusted by the objectification of women.

The final straw was whn I picked up a Spider-Man graphic novel from the library. I had mostly given up on the comics by this time, but wanted to read this one as I understood Pete and MJ were reuniting after their breakup.

In the middle of the story Pete and MJ are in bed. My problem with this is that MJ is depicted asleep, lying on her side with her top off and the blanket at waist level. The only thing preserving her modesty is an arm held in front of her which narrowly covers a small section of her pulchritudinous bosom.

That was it. I haven't picked up a comic since.

Now if gratuitous sex was the problem, why not support Spider-Girl, or if it was out at the time Marvel Adventures Spider-Man? The main problem itself isn't just that comics overdo adult material, but that some of the fandom spend more time critiquing rather than doing something to solve the problem.

Complaining while taking actions in the long run will make a world of difference, but merely complaining without doing anything to remedy the problem accomplishes nothing.

[Peter Paltridge]

In the middle of the story Pete and MJ are in bed. My problem with this is that MJ is depicted asleep, lying on her side with her top off and the blanket at waist level. The only thing preserving her modesty is an arm held in front of her which narrowly covers a small section of her pulchritudinous bosom.
Is this the page where Pete gives a hacky soliloquy that steals a famous quote from Jerry Maguire? Because if so, that wasn't the gratuitous sight he thinks it was.

[Antiyonder]

Is this the page where Pete gives a hacky soliloquy that steals a famous quote from Jerry Maguire? Because if so, that wasn't the gratuitous sight he thinks it was.

And I agree, but my main issue with his comment is that he has no desire to find a more satisfying comic, and thus contributes to the problem he complains about.

Now to go with a more relevant example, if a majority of readers were displeased with Identity Crisis' depiction of rape, then it seems to me that putting money behind The Batman, JLU and Teen Titans Go (As those were the All Ages DC titles at the time) would have been a more productive solution rather than supporting the remaining issue of IC.

[Matt Hazuda]

Now to go with a more relevant example, if a majority of readers were displeased with Identity Crisis' depiction of rape, then it seems to me that putting money behind The Batman, JLU and Teen Titans Go (As those were the All Ages DC titles at the time) would have been a more productive solution rather than supporting the remaining issue of IC.The problems with those comics is that they "don't matter" from the fanboy standpoint (not in continuity, based on a cartoon, etc), thus shouldn't be read.

This is the problem with most comics that aren't in canon though. There's just no way you'll get interest up for something if it doesn't "count."

[wonderfly]

Is this the page where Pete gives a hacky soliloquy that steals a famous quote from Jerry Maguire? Because if so, that wasn't the gratuitous sight he thinks it was.

Agreed: if this is the intimate moment from Stracynski's run on Amazing Spider-Man after they reunite as a couple (we see Peter lying in bed next to MJ, with him looking down on her asleep next to him, and thinking about how much he loves her...)...that's not gratiutiousness. That was a touching moment, and one of the best of JMS's run on Spider-Man.

I also agree with Antiyonder that gratitious cheesecake poses (which this was NOT) are not a reason to stop buying comics.

[Anthonynotes]

The problems with those comics is that they "don't matter" from the fanboy standpoint (not in continuity, based on a cartoon, etc), thus shouldn't be read.

This is the problem with most comics that aren't in canon though. There's just no way you'll get interest up for something if it doesn't "count."

That and even if they want to get into them, said titles too often seem to get easily canceled (see: DC recently axing "Billy Batson and the Magic of Shazam", or its earlier titles based on now-long-canceled cartoons---"JLU", "The Batman Strikes", etc.), possibly further discouraging getting into them. Such a fan might think, "better to stick with the regular Batman title (even if it's just endless stories of repetitive-Joker-mass-slaughter) vs going for one of the alternate titles and seeing it get axed soon as its parent cartoon's over?"

That said, if it weren't for Johnny DC, I wouldn't be buying any DC titles nowadays (save Showcase/trade paperback reprints)...

-B.

[Antiyonder]

That and even if they want to get into them, said titles too often seem to get easily canceled (see: DC recently axing "Billy Batson and the Magic of Shazam", or its earlier titles based on now-long-canceled cartoons---"JLU", "The Batman Strikes", etc.), possibly further discouraging getting into them. Such a fan might think, "better to stick with the regular Batman title (even if it's just endless stories of repetitive-Joker-mass-slaughter) vs going for one of the alternate titles and seeing it get axed soon as its parent cartoon's over?"

And ironically, the lack of customers prompt DC to pull the plug on said titles, thereforce discouraging customers from buying them. Unless of course that the sales have no bearing on the animated tie in titles continuing past their respective shows.

[Bat-Fan Beyond]

I think a title like "Billy Batson and The Magic of SHAZAM!" is discouraging for kids to get into. Where's the incentive to buy it? The title is not alluring enough.

For one, most kids don't even know who or what SHAZAM is, let alone care about somebody with the name Billy Batson, so unless you're a boy about 10 years old with the name Billy, you probably rather have a comic with a character you're more familiar with and that doesn't reveal his secret identity right on the cover.

Secondly, "Billy Batson and The Magic of SHAZAM!" is a mouthful to read and say as a title; I think "The Magic of SHAZAM!" would have sufficed (kids love magic), or maybe just simply "SHAZAM!"

To the publisher: You have to remember who you're marketing this stuff towards and although kids should never be talked down to or patronized with simplified or stupid concepts that adults seem to think kids are more inclined to be receptive to, you still have to make unfamiliar properties such as characters and titles that are new to kids a bit more enticing to get them to notice, otherwise they will just continue to gravitate toward the characters that they already know or that at least have better promotional attraction.

[Rick Jones]

I think a title like "Billy Batson and The Magic of SHAZAM!" is discouraging for kids to get into. Where's the incentive to buy it? The title is not alluring enough.

For one, most kids don't even know who or what SHAZAM is, let alone care about somebody with the name Billy Batson, so unless you're a boy about 10 years old with the name Billy, you probably rather have a comic with a character you're more familiar with and that doesn't reveal his secret identity right on the cover.

Secondly, "Billy Batson and The Magic of SHAZAM!" is a mouthful to read and say as a title; I think "The Magic of SHAZAM!" would have sufficed (kids love magic), or maybe just simply "SHAZAM!"

To the publisher: You have to remember who you're marketing this stuff towards and although kids should never be talked down to or patronized with simplified or stupid concepts that adults seem to think kids are more inclined to be receptive to, you still have to make unfamiliar properties such as characters and titles that are new to kids a bit more enticing to get them to notice, otherwise they will just continue to gravitate toward the characters that they already know or that at least have better promotional attraction.
I'm guessing they were probably hoping that the title would catch the eye of kids already familar with stuff like Harry Potter, Percy Jackson or any of the other popular book series that have similarly long titles for each installment. If I'm not mistaken, the proposed Captain Marvel movie that was in the works not too long ago was going to be called Billy Batson and The Power Of Shazam.

[Ed Liu]

I think a title like "Billy Batson and The Magic of SHAZAM!" is discouraging for kids to get into. Where's the incentive to buy it? The title is not alluring enough.
Sorry, but I can't buy your arguments at all. Harry Potter and the Sorceror's Stone is just as much of a mouthful. If Captain Marvel/Shazam has little name recognition among kids today, Harry Potter had no name recognition at all when the first book came out because he was an original character. Neither problem seems to have affected book sales negatively, or if they did, then Scholastic and J.K. Rowling sure didn't notice because they were too busy rolling around in gigantic piles of money.

About the only argument I can get behind is the idea about promotion and getting the book in front of your target audience, which is something DC and Marvel have never been good at with their kids' books. I've also read (and linked to a citation somewhere recently) that EVERY SINGLE ONE of DC's Johnny DC titles is a loss-leader, meaning DC loses money on them.

[Antiyonder]

For one, most kids don't even know who or what SHAZAM is, let alone care about somebody with the name Billy Batson, so unless you're a boy about 10 years old with the name Billy, you probably rather have a comic with a character you're more familiar with and that doesn't reveal his secret identity right on the cover.

Like Ed said, I can get behind the lack of promotion, but I disagree that the comic isn't accesible.

It's pretty straightforward and even plays upon the old wish fullfilment motif (kid becomes a full grown superhero by saying a particular word).

[Bat-Fan Beyond]

I don't recall ever saying that the Billy Batson and the Magic of Shazam! title wasn't "accessible" -- at least not as far as story goes. It could very well be one of the most accessible comics to read, simply because you don't need to have any previous knowledge of history and continuity that would normally weigh most comic book stories down nowadays. What I was saying was that the title itself (the name of the book) was too long (a mouthful) and the use of a proper name like Billy Batson could put kids off from it and that it was not "alluring" enough to make it approachable.

Well... maybe.

I guess I didn't consider the Harry Potter titles, and the like, when I was thinking about the Billy Batson title. I was strictly thinking about it in terms of it being quite an excessive length for a comic book title, which are normally short, dynamic and to the point (SHAZAM!). But I suppose the Harry Potter argument proves me wrong.

Although, I do still feel it's a valid argument that the length of a title could deter some kids from something they are unfamiliar with, especially when it comes to comic books, which doesn't seem to be the primary medium of children's entertainment anymore; That may be the very reason why the Harry Potter titles have succeeded, actually --They have the ability to reach out to more kids through the power of the movies, which is probably the most popular medium next to television to gain a young audience. Sadly, other than as a source of characters and concepts for other mediums, comics are not as popular with kids as they used to be. Part of that is because they're not primarily targeted for kids anymore, and, when they are, the publishers have a difficult time promoting them to and for that particular demographic.

[Ed Liu]

That may be the very reason why the Harry Potter titles have succeeded, actually --They have the ability to reach out to more kids through the power of the movies, which is probably the most popular medium next to television to gain a young audience.
I think you still have this backwards. Harry Potter was a publishing powerhouse before any of the movies came out. The movie deal only came about because the books were selling so well. If anything, I'd say the reality is the opposite of what you're suggesting: I think the Harry Potter books lifted ticket sales of the movies because every kid everywhere who ever read the books demanded to see the movies. The earlier movies were, at best, mediocre as films. It wasn't until around #3 or #4 that they actually became good films in their own right.

However, Harry Potter is very much the exception and not the rule, so generalizing on Harry Potter is a pretty dangerous thing to do. I still don't think that a long title will turn off kids just because it's long or, contrariwise, that a short title will be better at attracting their attention.

Kids are also buying plenty of comics, which are very successfully targeted to them in terms of marketing and content. They're just called "manga" (or Bone). The problem of kids not wanting to read comics is a problem for DC and Marvel exclusively, but I don't think it's any inherent problem in the material. However, I think I'm also straying a bit too far off-topic :).

[Rusakov]

Guys, I have an idea!

Looking at all of these comic book deaths that are supossed to be "edgy" but just end up seeming stupid or over the top, I think there should be a new award for comic books.

My concept: The Hugh Dawkins Award for Most Humiliating/Stupid Death of the Year Comic Book Award.

Named after the hero who was killed and turned into a fur rug (http://www.comicvine.com/tasmanian-devil/29-6532/).

Thoughts?

[Shawn Hopkins]

Guys, I have an idea!

Looking at all of these comic book deaths that are supossed to be "edgy" but just end up seeming stupid or over the top, I think there should be a new award for comic books.

My concept: The Hugh Dawkins Award for Most Humiliating/Stupid Death of the Year Comic Book Award.

Named after the hero who was killed and turned into a fur rug (http://www.comicvine.com/tasmanian-devil/29-6532/).

Thoughts?

I love it.

[Shawn Hopkins]

http://i473.photobucket.com/albums/rr94/shawnbuddy/GLEW_Cv5.jpg

The Red Lantern gimmick is just gross. That's all there is to it. Guy is one of my top 10 or so favorite characters and, yeah, he's been mistreated and misused in the past quite a bit, including being made a tattooed alien. But having the power to puke blood is a definite low point. No, I won't mince words. This is his lowest and most humiliating point, getting punched out by Batman or even being made grim and gritty was positively dignified by comparison to this scatological horror.

[Bloody Marquis]

"Honestly, when *all* the superhero comics are about ripping people's bits off and rubbing dead cats over themselves while pretending to be on heroin, The Authority as originally executed really doesn't bring the different any more, does it?" (http://www.newsarama.com/comics/creators-react-wildstorm-end-100922.html)

Ellis brings a point: How the darkest comics a decade ago seem much more normal now.

[Jacob T. Paschal]

Well, I hope he's at least aiming at an enemy's eyes. If puking blood's going to be a power he might as well use it right! ;)

[Shawn Hopkins]

This might not be so upsetting, and might even be funny in its audacity, on some gory indie book. But this is frickin' Green Lantern. I don't care if it's on a more "extreme" spinoff book, it's still frickin' Green Lantern, the same one that was just in that Batman Brave and The Bold videogame that was just released. Anyone who plays that game, likes the character, and goes to a comic shop to find out more about it is likely to be greeted with this, and unless they are a very immature and gore obsessed teen, their interest in comic books probably won't survive it.

Grant Morrison showed DC the way nearly two decades ago in Animal Man, but they've refused to listen to him so far.

"We thought that by making your world more violent, we would make it more 'realistic,' more 'adult.' God help us if that's what it means."
-Grant Morrison

[Jacob T. Paschal]

At the risk of just being told I'm wrong...you're comparing apples and oranges here, I think. The Guy Gardner of Batman: The Brave and the Bold (animation) is not the same Guy Gardner of the DCU. They have different histories and live in different worlds. I additionally find it hard to believe that the aforementioned panel is from an 'all audiences' title. It's clearly aimed at the audiences old enough to choose from themselves.

[Shawn Hopkins]

At the risk of just being told I'm wrong...you're comparing apples and oranges here, I think. The Guy Gardner of Batman: The Brave and the Bold (animation) is not the same Guy Gardner of the DCU. They have different histories and live in different worlds. I additionally find it hard to believe that the aforementioned panel is from an 'all audiences' title. It's clearly aimed at the audiences old enough to choose from themselves.

You're being a bit narrow minded. The characters may exist in different versions in different medias, but those are different versions, not different characters. The movie, cartoon, game and comic book Batman, are all still recognizably Batman. Same way with Guy. It's not as if they're walled off by media and there's no possibility of crossover interest, in fact none of the the characters would have grown as big as they are if not for crossover media. Superman got a huge push from his radio show and comic strip, for example.

That's not a panel. That's the cover. And yeah, it's what passes for an "all-ages" title at DC. It's a Green Lantern title, Green Lantern of their top five properties.

[Jacob T. Paschal]

A cover, eh? I'm surprised I hadn't see it until now.

I'm know nothing about DC's ratings system (comics always seem to have the most stupid systems as it is), but if this is 'all ages' what in the world counts for the kid-friendly stuff?

Not that I'm necessarily against the cover. It's all about shock value and hoping somebody'll pick it up to learn why there's a raging orange-haired guy (pun!) spewin' blood all over. Or maybe somebody's shooting tomato juice at his face and in the heat of battle he is angerly trying to consume it while fighting it out with this villain? :p

[Rusakov]

I love it.

I'll get started on it asap! Maybe we should find some contenders for the award...

[Shawn Hopkins]

I nominate the cat that a high on smack Arsenal "defended" from some thugs in Rise of Arsenal 3. We know it's dead after he's done with it, but it could have been alive when he started.

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.comicsalliance.com/media/2010/06/arsenal4.jpg

Also, the guy who got his face melted by Dex Starr's puke.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_rzdB5a4kLAo/S-4GRIdsQgI/AAAAAAAATkA/JHyY9BsTc8Q/s1600/dexstar2.jpg

[Rick Jones]

I'll get started on it asap! Maybe we should find some contenders for the award...
I doubt you'll have any shortage of nominees. Ryan Choi in the shoebox is my personal pick.

[Shawn Hopkins]

I doubt you'll have any shortage of nominees. Ryan Choi in the shoebox is my personal pick.

Yeah, not exactly dignified, huh?

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Ts8mp4kXt8w/S_ueY7d4AqI/AAAAAAAAAHI/8L1yXjCZBQc/s1600/posporo.jpg

[Anthonynotes]

Yeesh... yeah, that's a pretty low point for Guy Gardner. A GL puking more blood than I suspect the human body actually contains on the cover of a book tied to a major, PG-13-rated/all-ages-appealing motion picture?! *Sigh*... then again, Time-Warner and its subsidiaries always did have poor marketing skills/judgment (compared to the much-tighter-ship their archrival Disney runs).

[Bat-Fan Beyond]

I doubt you'll have any shortage of nominees. Ryan Choi in the shoebox is my personal pick.

Actually that looks more like a matchstick box. A tiny bit more demeaning.

[Shawn Hopkins]

Comic companies really shouldn't bother with replacing legacy heroes, especially replacing them with new minority characters in an attempt to add diversity. Because they know the fanboys are going to clamor for the old white guy back, and when the sales drop off they're going to give in and then the minority character has gots to go. Because that's what seems to sell comics these days that seems to mean a messy, humiliating death. I'm sure Ted Kord will come back eventually, for instance, and Jamie Reyes will probably be skewered on a pole or something. Maybe stepped on by a hard light construct boot.

[Bloody Marquis]

Comic companies really shouldn't bother with replacing legacy heroes, especially replacing them with new minority characters in an attempt to add diversity. Because they know the fanboys are going to clamor for the old white guy back, and when the sales drop off they're going to give in and then the minority character has gots to go. Because that's what seems to sell comics these days that seems to mean a messy, humiliating death. I'm sure Ted Kord will come back eventually, for instance, and Jamie Reyes will probably be skewered on a pole or something. Maybe stepped on by a hard light construct boot.
*cowers in fear at what they'll do to Renee Montoya if Sage ever comes back*

[Shawn Hopkins]

I have to admit here, through shame that's bitter and burns me, that I like Dex-Starr now that I've read his origin story. He's like a kitty cat Punisher. He's still an emblem of DC Comic's excess to me. But he's also a kitty! I can't be annoyed at such a cute, murderous kitty.

Here's an excerpt with a couple of pages from the origin.

http://www.thefanboyseo.com/comics/green-lantern-55-was-a-blast-because-of-the-red-lantern-cat

[Bloody Marquis]

You don't need to be ashamed. Dex-Starr's origin story got me too.

[Matt Hazuda]

I have to admit here, through shame that's bitter and burns me, that I like Dex-Starr now that I've read his origin story. He's like a kitty cat Punisher. He's still an emblem of DC Comic's excess to me. But he's also a kitty! I can't be annoyed at such a cute, murderous kitty.

Here's an excerpt with a couple of pages from the origin.

http://www.thefanboyseo.com/comics/green-lantern-55-was-a-blast-because-of-the-red-lantern-catI was about to scold you for hatin' on Dex, but I'm glad he's won you over. That origin story was pretty sad as well and in a roundabout way, also part of the original problem this topic addresses :sweat:

I read the last lines of the origin as the animal's dialogue from We3, which manages to make it an even sadder story for me.

[ryandcow]

I doubt you'll have any shortage of nominees. Ryan Choi in the shoebox is my personal pick.
Match box.

[Rusakov]

Hmmm, quite a few idiotic deaths. Perhaps this should be a contest...

[Peter Paltridge]

A cover, eh? I'm surprised I hadn't see it until now.

I'm know nothing about DC's ratings system (comics always seem to have the most stupid systems as it is), but if this is 'all ages' what in the world counts for the kid-friendly stuff?

Not that I'm necessarily against the cover. It's all about shock value and hoping somebody'll pick it up to learn why there's a raging orange-haired guy (pun!) spewin' blood all over. Or maybe somebody's shooting tomato juice at his face and in the heat of battle he is angerly trying to consume it while fighting it out with this villain? :p
The truth, via Progressive Ruin (http://www.progressiveruin.com) today:


Oh, hey, this series totally abbreviates as “GL: EW.” That works out nicely, considering.

[Bat-Fan Beyond]

With respect given to Watchmen and Batman: The Dark Knight Returns as examples of dark superhero stories that were good, as well as influential, if we were to make a list of other stories that exemplify dark superhero comics, but only those that are really bad and over the top -- the worst -- what would make the list?

I would say Batman: The Dark Knight Strikes Again and All Star Batman and Robin the Boy Wonder should certainly make the list.

What else?

What about...

The Ultimates/Ultimates 2? Ultimates 3 and Ultimatum?

Identity Crisis? Infinite Crisis? Final Crisis?

Justice League: Cry For Justice? Rise of Arsenal/Fall of Green Arrow?

[Shawn Hopkins]

Despite conventional Internet wisdom the Dark Knight Strikes Again is neither that bad nor especially dark. It's just a big crazy Justice League story and fanboys threw a rod because it wasn't a carbon copy of Dark Knight Returns. Ultimates is quite good and Ultimates 2 is excellent.

I would say Crisis on Infinite Earths deserves a mention for being the spiritual father of event snuff comics and for not holding up that great. They killed whole universes in that one. Then Zero Hour, which as far as I can tell was simply a plot to get rid of the Justice Society and make Hawkman even more confusing, a few issues near the end of the Eclipso series that indulged in wholesale D-List slaughter, Marvel's Edge sub-line (anyone but me remember this?), Identity Crisis, Infinite Crisis to some extent, Cry for Justice, Rise of Arsenal, Battle for Bludhaven, and Ultimatum are all good candidates.

[Bat-Fan Beyond]

One that I just thought of and think should probably be on the list is WildStorm's WildCATs/Aliens one-shot written by Warren Ellis.

Before Warren Ellis gave us The Authority, he did a somewhat revamped run on the WildStorm title Stormwatch, which essentially lead into The Authority series; But sandwiched inbetween the two titles was a crossover one-shot featuring WildStorm's flagship team WildCATs and 20th Century Fox's famous Aliens (under licensed to Dark Horse Comics).

Although the one-shot featured both the WildCATs and Aliens in the story and in the title, it really served as a finale to Ellis' Stormwatch run as the members of the Stormwatch team all met their end in an extremely quick and gruesome fashion as prey to the Aliens.

If you thought Jeph Loeb's rapid extermination of Marvel characters in Ultimatum was ridiculous, then you'd be really shocked if you had been reading Stormwatch and cared about the characters prior to WildCATs/Aliens, because in only the first few pages of the one-shot, the entire team is slaughtered with no remorse and practically no sign of who they were.

And when I say no remorse, I mean no remorse on the part of Warren Ellis, who obviously tired of Stormwatch and really wanted to kill the characters off just so he could move on to The Authority. It was certainly quick and senseless.

[Superpan]

Actually, I loved Infinite Crisis. I mean it was the first big event I really ever read as it came out, plus all those years of buildup and it actually had a story to tell about what the DC heroes meant, plus how it bult off the continuity going back to 1938 was actually really enjoyable to me.

While I have seen much controversy around the violence, the only offenders in that catergory (if I remember correctly) were Black Adam and Superboy-Prime, who were uber-powerful psychos and thus would NOT hold back their powers. So of course the results would be bloody. However, everything after that point was excessive I'll admit. It seems like the writers of the mainstream DC/Marvel comics have really crossed the line from action being common-place to violence having replaced it.

[Ed Liu]

Despite conventional Internet wisdom the Dark Knight Strikes Again is neither that bad nor especially dark. It's just a big crazy Justice League story and fanboys threw a rod because it wasn't a carbon copy of Dark Knight Returns.
No, actually, I didn't like DKSA because I just thought it sucked. It's a carbon-copy of everything else Frank Miller has written since he started writing Sin City, except with DC characters, and suffers from everything that makes me dismiss his recent writing as easily as I will praise his earlier works. I didn't find it especially dark or gritty, though, mostly because I just couldn't muster the energy to feel much of anything but disappointment at it.


Ultimates is quite good and Ultimates 2 is excellent.
Erg. I dislike Mark Millar's writing largely because his one and only approach since he picked up The Authority is "Let's make everyone a complete and total jackass" (and I'd prefer to use a stronger word of comparable length that is not permitted on the forums). I also feel like they're all the same jackass in different skins more often than not. The Ultimates are the Avengers if all of them were jackasses. The comics themselves are wonderfully done giant-scale, wide-screen mayhem once they just shut up and start belting each other, but sooner or later they start talking again and that's when I kind of shut down over them. Never made it to Ultimates 2.

More pertinent to the topic, I also think that the success of The Authority was also one of the worst things to happen to comics, since (like Watchmen and DKR) I think everyone completely misinterpreted the point of the exercise, including (especially?) Mark Millar. The whole idea of The Authority seems to me to be the flip side to Peter Parker's "Great Power/Great Responsiblity" axiom, where the heroes both take their responsibility a lot more seriously than the Justice League (to pick one example) and don't pull their punches. It's playing with the fascination with fascism that's lurking just under the surface of all superhero comics, but I think it's more as a cautionary tale than something meant to be emulated. It seems that the larger lesson almost everyone picked up from that was that you could do more extreme ultra-violence (even if The Authority doesn't really do that much on-panel) and turn all your characters into those unlikeable fascists and the fans will eat that up. It's the same sort of thing where Alan Moore created Rorschach to be an obviously psychotic monster and was then horrified to find that almost everyone thinks he's the coolest character in Watchmen.

[Bat-Fan Beyond]

No, actually, I didn't like DKSA because I just thought it sucked. It's a carbon-copy of everything else Frank Miller has written since he started writing Sin City, except with DC characters, and suffers from everything that makes me dismiss his recent writing as easily as I will praise his earlier works. I didn't find it especially dark or gritty, though, mostly because I just couldn't muster the energy to feel much of anything but disappointment at it.


Erg. I dislike Mark Millar's writing largely because his one and only approach since he picked up The Authority is "Let's make everyone a complete and total jackass" (and I'd prefer to use a stronger word of comparable length that is not permitted on the forums). I also feel like they're all the same jackass in different skins more often than not. The Ultimates are the Avengers if all of them were jackasses. The comics themselves are wonderfully done giant-scale, wide-screen mayhem once they just shut up and start belting each other, but sooner or later they start talking again and that's when I kind of shut down over them. Never made it to Ultimates 2.

More pertinent to the topic, I also think that the success of The Authority was also one of the worst things to happen to comics, since (like Watchmen and DKR) I think everyone completely misinterpreted the point of the exercise, including (especially?) Mark Millar. The whole idea of The Authority seems to me to be the flip side to Peter Parker's "Great Power/Great Responsiblity" axiom, where the heroes both take their responsibility a lot more seriously than the Justice League (to pick one example) and don't pull their punches. It's playing with the fascination with fascism that's lurking just under the surface of all superhero comics, but I think it's more as a cautionary tale than something meant to be emulated. It seems that the larger lesson almost everyone picked up from that was that you could do more extreme ultra-violence (even if The Authority doesn't really do that much on-panel) and turn all your characters into those unlikeable fascists and the fans will eat that up. It's the same sort of thing where Alan Moore created Rorschach to be an obviously psychotic monster and was then horrified to find that almost everyone thinks he's the coolest character in Watchmen.


I totally agree with everything you said.

[Wonderwall]

No, actually, I didn't like DKSA because I just thought it sucked. It's a carbon-copy of everything else Frank Miller has written since he started writing Sin City, except with DC characters, and suffers from everything that makes me dismiss his recent writing as easily as I will praise his earlier works. I didn't find it especially dark or gritty, though, mostly because I just couldn't muster the energy to feel much of anything but disappointment at it.

And for me it's just butt ugly to look at. It's still art and it needs to be pleasing to look at but I can't fathom anyone liking it. I don't really like Miller's art even back in his early days( although I like the early part of DKR artwork ) but this was just horrific and I think this was the kind of early with digital coloring and it just looked bad along with the random pages of photoshop effects.

[Shawn Hopkins]

Erg. I dislike Mark Millar's writing largely because his one and only approach since he picked up The Authority is "Let's make everyone a complete and total jackass" (and I'd prefer to use a stronger word of comparable length that is not permitted on the forums). I also feel like they're all the same jackass in different skins more often than not. The Ultimates are the Avengers if all of them were jackasses. The comics themselves are wonderfully done giant-scale, wide-screen mayhem once they just shut up and start belting each other, but sooner or later they start talking again and that's when I kind of shut down over them. Never made it to Ultimates 2.

More pertinent to the topic, I also think that the success of The Authority was also one of the worst things to happen to comics, since (like Watchmen and DKR) I think everyone completely misinterpreted the point of the exercise, including (especially?) Mark Millar. The whole idea of The Authority seems to me to be the flip side to Peter Parker's "Great Power/Great Responsiblity" axiom, where the heroes both take their responsibility a lot more seriously than the Justice League (to pick one example) and don't pull their punches. It's playing with the fascination with fascism that's lurking just under the surface of all superhero comics, but I think it's more as a cautionary tale than something meant to be emulated. It seems that the larger lesson almost everyone picked up from that was that you could do more extreme ultra-violence (even if The Authority doesn't really do that much on-panel) and turn all your characters into those unlikeable fascists and the fans will eat that up. It's the same sort of thing where Alan Moore created Rorschach to be an obviously psychotic monster and was then horrified to find that almost everyone thinks he's the coolest character in Watchmen.

Ultimates 2 is the better one. The characters get better developed, there's more humor and Hank Pym actually gets likeable in kind of a sad sack, still can't forgive him way, and there's a better-defined political statement. Well, more like a political question, maybe. You might still hate it, but it's the superior work. :)

And that's the funny thing about Authority. Authority imitators, including later writers on the Authority book, took something the comic wasn't necessarily rooting for as a good thing and started promoting it. I think Authority is at its heart Warren Ellis wish fulfillment. What he and I have to admit a lot of others would like to see superheroes do even if it would never work in the real world. It's Superman picking up Hitler and Stalin and delivering them to the League of Nations, except with lots of explosions. I think Warren himself summed the Authority's ideology up as "There are bastards. Let's kill them!"

Anyway, when I acknowledge that that's where he's coming from, it's really hard for me to summon up the lack of self-awareness and sense of irony that would be necessary to criticize a superhero comic for containing a wish fulfillment fantasy.


And for me it's just butt ugly to look at. It's still art and it needs to be pleasing to look at but I can't fathom anyone liking it. I don't really like Miller's art even back in his early days( although I like the early part of DKR artwork ) but this was just horrific and I think this was the kind of early with digital coloring and it just looked bad along with the random pages of photoshop effects.

It isn't Neal Adams in that it tries to be smooth and realistic and attractive, it's kind of funky and experimental. "Ugly art," as defined by David Wolk in his "Reading Comics" is probably too strong a term for it because there are some scenes where it still tries to abstractly evoke the awe of a superhero's rippling physique, but it does have elements of that. I personally tend to like this kind of out there art, I was a big fan of Keith Giffen's weirdo period and I like Sam Kieth.

You can't lay it on the early days of digital coloring, though, they had been doing that for years when this came out in 2001. Somebody did go nuts with the Photoshop effects, though. :)

[Jadeling]

Can I nominate Kurt Wagner/Nightcrawler's death as being over the top and part of a cheap gimmick to shock the X-men/Marvel comic fanbase?

[Ed Liu]

Anyway, when I acknowledge that that's where he's coming from, it's really hard for me to summon up the lack of self-awareness and sense of irony that would be necessary to criticize a superhero comic for containing a wish fulfillment fantasy.
Oh, I actually kind of like Ellis' run on The Authority. I should make that clear, and I get where he's coming from and can even get behind it in some ways. I just don't even think that anybody who came after him had that much thought in it. If there was still wish-fulfillment after that, it was only of the variety that said, "If I had all this power, I'd use it to be a complete and total putz to people I don't like just because I could," which is a pretty venal and stupid wish to have no matter how much we may wish that.

[Bat-Fan Beyond]

A question for anyone who knows.

Is Marvel's Ultimatum mini-series by Jeph Loeb and David Finch really as bad as everyone says?

I hear this series is absolutely terrible. I've read enough about it to know what happens in it and I never really cared about the Ultimate Universe anyway, so I'm not sure it'll bother me as much as it did some, but as an alternate What if-type story, I think I may like it.

The main reason I ask is because I'm attracted to dark, end of the world stories, and I really love David Finch's art.

Just to give you an idea of how I view things sometimes -- Like many fans, I loved Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns, but absolutely hated The Dark Knight Strikes Again, yet as equally bad as his All Star Batman and Robin is, I can still read it over and over again and accept (or ignore) just how bad it is, simply because the artwork by Jim Lee is so amazing.

I love David Finch's art almost the same way as Jim Lee's, so I'm tempted to buy Ultimatum just for the art, but I'd still like to know if there's any redeeming factor to the story at all.

Thanks.

[Shawn Hopkins]

I've flipped through Ultimatum, and what I could see was gawdawful. When Jeph Loeb was good, he was very good indeed. But when he was bad, he was horrid.

[Matt Hazuda]

I've flipped through Ultimatum, and what I could see was gawdawful. When Jeph Loeb was good, he was very good indeed. But when he was bad, he was horrid.Gotta agree. Loeb took a long slide downward in quality years back and this wasn't a gem. I don't know what caused him to turn to crap. Maybe taking lessons from Chris Claremont? :sweat:

[Bloody Marquis]

I don't know what caused him to turn to crap.
Well, his son's death must have done something to the poor guy. And a few of his stories seem to hint at this.

[Bat-Fan Beyond]

Wow, I suppose unlike The Dark Knight Strikes Again and All Star Batman and Robin, Ultimatum isn't even worth viewing as a parody.

Okay, so I guess if I do decide to pick it up, I should do it only for the not-so-pretty, but still admirable pictures.

[Rick Jones]

Wow, I suppose unlike The Dark Knight Strikes Again and All Star Batman and Robin, Ultimatum isn't even worth viewing as a parody.

Okay, so I guess if I do decide to pick it up, I should do it only for the not-so-pretty, but still admirable pictures.
Be prepared for superhero/supervillain cannibalism and other sorts of goofy fun .

I liked some of Finch's stuff in the past, don't care too much for it now, but I wouldn't call this one of his prettiest books by any means.

[Shawn Hopkins]

Be prepared for superhero/supervillain cannibalism and other sorts of goofy fun .

I liked some of Finch's stuff in the past, don't care too much for it now, but I wouldn't call this one of his prettiest books by any means.

By the way, when he mentions both superhero and supervillain cannibalism, that's because it contains instances of both.

[Matt Hazuda]

Well, his son's death must have done something to the poor guy. And a few of his stories seem to hint at this.I would ahve said that myself, but even a good 2 or 3 years beforehand the cracks started showing. This has been going on longer since before he knew his son was going to die, it's just something like Ultimatum or Ultimates 3 brought it to a complete head. They were just garbage.

[Bat-Fan Beyond]

Be prepared for superhero/supervillain cannibalism and other sorts of goofy fun.


You mean like this?

The Blob meets Hank Pym. Yum!

http://img37.imageshack.us/img37/535/yellowjacketvstheblob.jpg



It may be ridiculous on Loeb's part, but didn't Millar's Ultimate Hulk eat people, too?

[suss2it]

You mean like this?

The Blob meets Hank Pym. Yum!

http://img37.imageshack.us/img37/535/yellowjacketvstheblob.jpg



It may be ridiculous on Loeb's part, but didn't Millar's Ultimate Hulk eat people, too?
Ultimate Hulk is an actual monster so him eating people (not sure if he actually did, however he did eat an alien) makes more sense than Ant-Man eating the Blob.

[Matt Hazuda]

Ultimate Hulk is an actual monster so him eating people (not sure if he actually did, however he did eat an alien) makes more sense than Ant-Man eating the Blob.Hulk did eat a fat man and stole his pants early on in Ultimates (#4 or 5 maybe?) It was off-camera though and only mentioned as happening, so it just felt more comedic than shock-value.

[Bat-Fan Beyond]

Ultimate Hulk is an actual monster so him eating people (not sure if he actually did, however he did eat an alien) makes more sense than Ant-Man eating the Blob.

From what I've seen of this shot, Pym doesn't actually eat Blob, he just bites his head off and spits it out, because he found Blob eating Wasp! Blob's the cannibal; Pym's just making sure the punishment fits the crime.

[Matt Hazuda]

Well, at least some decent jokes (http://www.multiversitycomics.com/2010/10/dcbernard-chang-sneak-in-bestworst-joke.html) can come out of these "Dark" stories.

I wonder if anyone at editorial realized this before OKing it :sweat:

[Shawn Hopkins]

Well, at least some decent jokes (http://www.multiversitycomics.com/2010/10/dcbernard-chang-sneak-in-bestworst-joke.html) can come out of these "Dark" stories.

I wonder if anyone at editorial realized this before OKing it :sweat:

I saw that and thought it was great. I guess the Bizarro element is that they are live cats.

[macattack]

The worst part of Ultimatum was the death of Doctor Strange in such a randomly violent way (and with such a ridiculous facial expression) after Bendis spent an entire issue of Ultimate Spider-Man trying to save the guy.

Bendis was basically getting slapped in the face by Loeb the whole time, now that I think about it.

I'm not a Bendis apologist but his work has always been golden in the Ultimate universe for some reason and the Ultimatum issues of Ultimate Spider-Man are quite decent work and do a much more credible job with the all-out destruction than Loeb does. There's some actual feeling there too, especially in the last issue of the arc which is completely silent without dialogue or SFX.

[Bat-Fan Beyond]

Another comic that fits into the Zeitgeist of dark superheroes is Craig Kyle's and Chris Yost's X-FORCE.

Having never read it, I'm not sure how good it actually is, but I am kind of drawn to it because of its dark concept and artwork.

Has anyone here read it? If so, what did you think?

http://i667.photobucket.com/albums/vv39/zoozone/X-FORCE-1.jpg

[Shawn Hopkins]

Another comic that fits into the Zeitgeist of dark superheroes is Craig Kyle's and Chris Yost's X-FORCE.

Having never read it, I'm not sure how good it actually is, but I am kind of drawn to it because of its dark concept and artwork.

Has anyone here read it? If so, what did you think?

http://i667.photobucket.com/albums/vv39/zoozone/X-FORCE-1.jpg

I read the first two trades and they're really rather well done, except for being a bit self-conscious about the violence which would happen naturally with the concept. It raises interesting moral questions, especially when you consider who is behind it, and doesn't give easy answers. There is a pat answer given in the second volume but I don't think that's intended to be taken at face value, instead it's just a character deluding himself that his foundation is sound even though he's walking quicksand.

[Bat-Fan Beyond]

I read the first two trades and they're really rather well done, except for being a bit self-conscious about the violence which would happen naturally with the concept. It raises interesting moral questions, especially when you consider who is behind it, and doesn't give easy answers. There is a pat answer given in the second volume but I don't think that's intended to be taken at face value, instead it's just a character deluding himself that his foundation is sound even though he's walking quicksand.

I picked up the first three trade volumes this week and I actually just finished reading the first one straight through this morning.

I LOVED it!

I haven't read any X-Men comics since Whedon's Astonishing X-Men, but this X-Force was a pleasant surprise for me. Yeah, it's dark and gritty, violent and gorey, but I don't think any of it is gratuitous or senseless; It very much serves the story, and the story is great, as well as the art. This was right up my alley.
---------------------------

Also, last week I read Justice League: Cry for Justice. The art by Mauro Cascioli is amazing, and I actually thought the story was pretty good, although the last issue/chapter seemed both rushed in writing and in art and was the weakest part of it.

I really don't read Justice League regularly, and while I am more a fan of the iconic team line-up of Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Green Lantern, The Flash, Aquaman, Martian Manhunter, etc., I found the team line-up in this serious -- featuring Green Lantern, Green Arrow, The Atom, Supergirl, Captain Marvel/Shazam (Freddy Freeman), Congorilla, and Starman -- to be really cool. I'm only familiar with about half of those characters, but I thought they were all interesting and made up a great team dynamic.

I know this is considered one of those controversial stories where fans didn't like some of the decisions that were made with certain characters, specifically with what happens with Red Arrow/Arsenal and then Green Arrow, and although I like those characters, maybe I'm just not as invested in them as much as other fans are, and because I don't read their series on a regular basis, I'm a bit ignorant with their recent status prior to this series, so I really didn't have a problem with the direction that was taken with them in it. Just like with X-Force,I thought that, although there is no definitive answer, it did, satisfyingly enough for me at least, address the moral question of how right or wrong it is for superheroes to kill or torture if it's for a greater good. Overall, it wasn't perfect, but I enjoyed it quite a bit.

[Shawn Hopkins]

Hey, here's a really great article about DC's recent pointless deaths. Check it out.

http://gone-and-forgotten.blogspot.com/2011/02/dc-comics-most-pointless-deaths.html

[suss2it]

Hey, here's a really great article about DC's recent pointless deaths. Check it out.

http://gone-and-forgotten.blogspot.com/2011/02/dc-comics-most-pointless-deaths.html
That was a good read. I liked his idea of Roy struggling with his addiction & trying to be a good father. It makes more sense than what they're doing with him now.

[GWOtaku]

This is a variant cover for Flashpoint #2 for reasons beyond the comprehension of sane mortals. It's non-bloody but violent & unpleasant so I'll just leave the link instead of posting the image.

http://dcwomenkickingass.tumblr.com/post/6075862904/flashpoint2#disqus_thread

No big deal though I guess since TIME TRAVEL DID IT

[Shawn Hopkins]

This is a variant cover for Flashpoint #2 for reasons beyond the comprehension of sane mortals. It's non-bloody but violent & unpleasant so I'll just leave the link instead of posting the image.

http://dcwomenkickingass.tumblr.com/post/6075862904/flashpoint2#disqus_thread

No big deal though I guess since TIME TRAVEL DID IT

That's today's DC comics for you. It's apparently a reference to this famous cover that William Gaines struggled to justify during a Congressional hearing:



http://www.comicbookdb.com/graphics/comic_graphics/1/33/20527_20051223130916_large.jpg



Someone who agrees with my analysis:

http://thanley.wordpress.com/2011/06/01/flashpoint-2-variant-cover-is-pretty-messed-up/


You know, if DC would make a serious pledge to remove the snuff element from their comics, I would get behind the reboot. Doesn't seem likely considering that the very event that leads into it features beheadings, though.