posted
You bring up a great new topic though Lardy. What do you recommend someone who used to love comics but hardly reads them anymore?
My Dad dislikes comics that are incomplete stories, or at the very most, don't run for more than three issues.
My Dad isn't going to be reading month to month--so the series needs to be relatively self-contained.
He has his favorites from his former experiences reading comics but doesn't want a retread of old ideas. Because frankly, he thinks the originals were better anyway.
What series does all this?
I can name dozens. For the sake or narrowing it down. What superhero series does all this?
From: If you don't want my peaches, honey... | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sounds like you're trying to describe Brave and the Bold, or any given three issue arc of Batman and Robin.
From: Moncton, New Brunswick, Canada | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Cobalt Kid: You bring up a great new topic though Lardy. What do you recommend someone who used to love comics but hardly reads them anymore?
My Dad dislikes comics that are incomplete stories, or at the very most, don't run for more than three issues.
My Dad isn't going to be reading month to month--so the series needs to be relatively self-contained.
He has his favorites from his former experiences reading comics but doesn't want a retread of old ideas. Because frankly, he thinks the originals were better anyway.
What series does all this?
I can name dozens. For the sake or narrowing it down. What superhero series does all this?
I'd have to concur with B&B as a terrific choice. It's usual done-in-one style combined with a classic yet modern feel would seem the perfect way to rope someone like your dad in. You don't have to worry about continuity or crossovers either.
Also, I keep thinking about Invincible. It also combines classic superhero formulas with modern sensibilities. I know you, Des, are not entirely sold on it, but he may feel differently. There are some multi-part storylines, but they tend to run about four parts max. Lots of done-in-ones sprinkled in as well and unreliant on crossovers (with the sole exception of a brief Astonishing Wolfman 2-parter). It's like a modern Spider-man series in tone but is definitely its own thing.
Astro City would be an easy recommendation. Yes, it has some multi-parters (especially Dark Age). I'd give him the original miniseries with its done-in-ones as a fine starting point.
And it's hard to beat Incredible Hercules for a singularly fun celebaration of superhero comics. As you know, it's far from just a comedy series, but the sense of fun is always there.
Otherwise, there's All-Star Superman, Ultimate Spider-man and Booster Gold that would seem like sure bets.
-------------------- "Suck it, depressos!"--M. Lash
From: The Underbelly of Society | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think Kirkman is unquestionably the writer outside of the Big Two with the most power. Just let two words roll thru your brain for one moment: Image Partner. Kirkman's the first non-artist ever to get a partnership in Image and the first to be allowed in who wasn't a founder. That's influence, my friend!
Who else is even in the ballpark? Ennis? Moore? Gaiman? Ellis? All of these guys can do whatever they want should they desire to. Moore writes very little these days, but he always does it on his own terms. Gaiman practically walked away but could write his own paycheck if he ever wanted to. Ellis still does a lot of work both inside and outside the big two. Ennis is still prolific but has recently focussed solely on creator-owned work.
-------------------- "Suck it, depressos!"--M. Lash
From: The Underbelly of Society | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Y'know, at some point we moved past Grant Morrison before I'd really delved into him enough. I wasn't through with him dammit!!!
Here's a sampling of some of the Morrison discussion a few pages ago:
quote:Originally posted by Cobalt Kid: I get what you're saying about Morrison, though I find it a lot less than you do I think.
I think Morrison is quite brilliant and the way in which he evokes grand, epic storylines while at the same time keeping things quirky in a way only the comic book medium could do it is so enjoyable for me that I forgive him all of his 'minor' flaws. I think Eryk was right in that he represents the spirit of the Silver Age better than any other writer (besides perhaps Cooke), in that he is all about a sense of "creation" in everything he does, even when he is telling types of stories that have been told before.
You're point about not connecting with his characters is well taken. I think that's one of his "minor" flaws--in that it doesn't bother me that much. It's quite in the tradition of the Golden Age and Silver Age (of which I'm a fan), and it's all up to the reader to 'read into' the stories to the degree they connect with the characters. What I mean is, Morrison wastes no time with quiet character moments. If you, as the reader, connect with a character from his stories, that says more about you than the story. And I'm okay with that. But I do understand that might not be everyone's cup of tea. Yet, I do think he does have characters undergo a journey in all of his stories. Seven Soldiers really showcased this, with Zatanna, Guardian, Shining Knight and the rest really having some character development, though it was more subtle. In a way, his storylines are more grand and epic and his character development is more restrained--but at times, equally as powerful.
Now despite all this praise, sometimes Grant has some misses for me. Final Crisis was just awful to me. I get what he was trying to do but in my mind, he didn't accomplish it. And I loved his Batman stories with Bruce; but his Batman stories with Dick are leaving me cold. Yes, I require a better story to convince me to accept Dick as Batman that perhaps is unfair. But I expected Grant do actually do that. And he didn't. I actually have been in a 'burnt out on Grant' mode myself lately, to the degree I did not continue with "Joe the Barbarian" at Vertigo.
Still, despite my current 'burnt out' mode on Grant, I still love him as a writer. I think I'd probably rank him in my top 10. I think the ratio of "blown away by the amazingness to noticing the flaws" is just higher than Geoff's for me. Such a ratio is far too hard to calculate with mere words.
Grant Morrison also wrote All-Star Superman #6--which is the best single issue comic book story of the last 10+ years, perhaps the last 20 years. I have yet to see something that tops or matches it.
quote:Originally posted by Blacula: I'm trying to think of Grant Morrison books I've read and all I can come up with is JLA, All-Star Superman, Final Crisis, Seven Soldiers and Batman.
Of them, Seven Soldiers is definitely my favourite. If it hadn't been for the disappointing final issue it would probably be my favourite comics project of all time.
And I think this book(s) was dripping in the characterisation you say Morrison currently lacks Lard Lad. Zatanna, Bulleteer, Manhattan Guardian, Frankenstein, Klarion... these characters came to life for me. All that and this project had some of the highest high-concepts I've ever read. Characters, concepts, plotting, storytelling, art - this project knocked it out of the park IMO.
Batman was also a total WIN for me. I'd been secretly denying it to myself because I was always kind of anti him before... but I honestly think that Batman under Grant Morrison was my favourite book on the stands during his run. It was truly, truly exciting and RIP was a masterpiece IMO. (Batman & Robin has been less good but still excellent.) But this is another example of Morrison bringing the characterisation goods. I never cared one iota about Bruce Wayne before Morrison started writing him.
All-Star Superman was of course excellent and deserving of all it's accolades. Though I agree with you that it wasn't perfect. I can't quite put my finger on what about it was less than perfection but I must admit that something about the project left me a little cold. Like a wonderful work of art that you can admire but not get totally excited by. I still really enjoyed it though.
Final Crisis was of course drek and only gets worse the more I remember of it (which is not much - for a Grant Morrison book it was very light on ideas. Darkseid died, New Gods started infecting people, Barry Allen came back, Superman sang a song... did anything else happen?). A shame because it had started with some promise.
JLA was my first exposure to Grant Morrison. I'm surprised you think of this as an example of good Morrison characterisation Lard Lad because I can't think of any from it. I really didn't like this run. It was all flash and no substance IMO. There were some cool ideas and not every issue was bad but I found it all so very unengaging and overrated. I still think World War III is one of the worst JLA stories I've ever read and Crisis Times Five wasn't much better. Rock of Ages and that Conner Hawke/Key story were pretty good though so I'll give him that.
^ Having said all that, I did buy every issue and I'm tempted to reread them now that I'm more of a Morrison fan than I was then to see if my opinion on these issues hasn't changed somewhat.
I'd actually put Morrison and Johns on a par as far as my enjoyment of their stories goes. Morrison impresses me more and I can usually tell I'm reading higher quality writing when I'm reading one of his books. But Johns tends to use the parts of the DCU that appeal to me more and has a uniformity to his stories that (though a bit samey sometimes) often provide the perfect 15 minutes of enjoyment I'm looking for when I want to just kick back with a good comic book and forget about the world for a while.
quote:Originally posted by Officer Taylor:
quote:Originally posted by rouge: If you don't think Morrison can do character work, you need to sit down and read We3, Vinamarama and Seaguy back to back and have your mind seriously changed.
"We3" in particular is a masterpiece and it all rests on giving these barely communicative animals such strong personalities that you get totally involved with the story.
Though I haven't read We3, I didn't mean to imply that character work was non-existent in Morrison's work. I feel, for example, that what I've read of his Animal Man was pretty strong in that regard. It's just in my opinion it's a pretty common complaint I have about his stuff. Obviously, I haven't read every single thing he's written, and there are some notable exceptions in what I have read.
Again, my other general complaint is that I have no idea what's going on in certain parts of his stories, and it usually seems rooted in his storytelling methods, as opposed to being a set-up for a mystery resolution at some point. Final Crisis was rife with this problem, and Batman R.I.P. had some of those issues as well (though I enjoyed the latter overall). I found Seven Soldiers: Zatanna confusing as well.
It's not that I'm not up for a challenging read. It's that I can rarely crack whatever code it is he uses to tell his story. It reads as if he understands what he's trying to do, but he may not realize some or most people don't. There's almost always that aspect to his scripts.
Just for the sake of comparison, I'll give you Alan Moore's run on Promethea. That was an extremely challenging book on very many levels that threw tons of huge concepts at the reader continually. But challenging as it was, I was able to follow what Moore was trying to do despite its complexity. And that's a tribute to how Alan can present concepts that are big, challenging and entertaining reads without losing me on the way. (It also has some great characterization!) If you haven't checked it out, try Promethea some time and imagine how Grant might have written it.
Other works like All-Star Superman and Batman & Robin are pretty clear and cohesive but lack an extra punch somewhere. Could be a lack of characterization, could be an ordinariness. Hard to say. But generally, I rarely put a Grant comic down completely satisfied.
Some examples of complete satisfaction being achieved were his first two or three Doom Patrol arcs and his spotlight issue on Crazy Jane from same. Certain issues of All-Star were absolutlely perfect, too.
quote:Originally posted by Blacula: JLA was my first exposure to Grant Morrison. I'm surprised you think of this as an example of good Morrison characterisation Lard Lad because I can't think of any from it. I really didn't like this run. It was all flash and no substance IMO. There were some cool ideas and not every issue was bad but I found it all so very unengaging and overrated. I still think World War III is one of the worst JLA stories I've ever read and Crisis Times Five wasn't much better. Rock of Ages and that Conner Hawke/Key story were pretty good though so I'll give him that.
JLA I'm overall satisfied with because his Big Ideas and storytelling style were understandable and rarely lost me. His characterizations could have definitely been better, but I feel he did his job enough conveying their personalities and attitudes when considering it was a team book consisting almost entirely of characters who had their own books. And for better or worse, his take on Batman there was pretty damn iconic!
Can we get more perspectives on Morrison and reactions to what's been said? I'd love to hear people expand more on his peaks and valleys and what makes his good stuff good and his not-so-good-stuff, well, not-so-good!
I'd love to hear from anyone who's read Alan Moore's Promethea and who'd like to compare it to Morrison's more high-concept works.
And I'd REALLY love to hear from anyone out there who actually liked Final Crisis!
-------------------- "Suck it, depressos!"--M. Lash
From: The Underbelly of Society | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
My problem with Morrison is that he wants to recreate the sense of wonder of his beloved Silver Age but is too much of a smug cynic to pull it off. JLA felt too smug and calculated in its big-ness, and his take on Batman was all about being smug and calculating. That said, I did enjoy the "Crisis Times Five" arc because it struck a perfect balance that eluded Morrison on his other JLA arcs. I also think that "Seven Soldiers" had its moments (it's one of the few times I liked Zatanna), and that while I disagree with a lot of what he was saying in "Animal Man," at least he was still relatively unknown when he wrote it and he had not yet cultivated his mystique, which is one of the things I find most annoying about him (now, true, he was writing "Doom Patrol" at about the same time and I found what little I read of it excruciating -- weirdness for its own sake, and it was also chronologically where the smugness first surfaced.)
posted
Animal an was personally the best thing I've read of his in mainstream super-hero comics. It was big conceopt and extremely well thought out.
We3 was great.
Seven Soldiers was good, and I thought he pulled off the no team team pretty well.
His JLA was good overall, but was like watching a Bruckheimer movie. Big budget action flicks without any real heart. Not to say I didn't enjoy them, just that, believe it or not, they usually felt rushed.
Have not read his Final Crisis, or Batman stuff. Just not interesting to me at this point. I want to read FC, but have to wait for the trade at the library...which I have not been to in a while.
From: Turn around... | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
First, Rogue and Lardy you guys have some good suggestions. Brave & Bold is a really good one, which I also considered. Astro City was also a really good one too which for whatever reason I hadn't thought about.
With my father, he puts a lot more focus on the artwork than I do. You'll recall that was one of the major gripes I have with Invincible, so I'm not sure if Invincible would work for him.
On the other hand, artwork is hardly the problem in superhero comic book these days. I feel for the most part, artists are doing great job. My major overall complaints in the comic book industry is many young artists grew up on comic books and don't draw from life (unlike the original artists in comics). This often leads to lack of backgrounds and limited scope of compositions. Also, there is no need to draw talking heads, there are dozens of ways to draw exciting things while people have conversations.
But I'm drifting again.
quote:Originally posted by Fanfic Lass: My problem with Morrison is that he wants to recreate the sense of wonder of his beloved Silver Age but is too much of a smug cynic to pull it off. JLA felt too smug and calculated in its big-ness, and his take on Batman was all about being smug and calculating. That said, I did enjoy the "Crisis Times Five" arc because it struck a perfect balance that eluded Morrison on his other JLA arcs. I also think that "Seven Soldiers" had its moments (it's one of the few times I liked Zatanna), and that while I disagree with a lot of what he was saying in "Animal Man," at least he was still relatively unknown when he wrote it and he had not yet cultivated his mystique, which is one of the things I find most annoying about him (now, true, he was writing "Doom Patrol" at about the same time and I found what little I read of it excruciating -- weirdness for its own sake, and it was also chronologically where the smugness first surfaced.)
Fanfic Lass brings up a great point (I'll have to get used to calling you that, Stealth ). Morrison, like the other writers who crossed the pond in the 80's and 90's are very much a product of the Thatcher era. They often have a pessimistic view stemming from a sense of betrayal they felt during the Thatcher years. I've read quite a few great interviews with them to see that (Morrison, Moore, Ennis, etc.).
The Silver Age, on the other hand, had a great sense of optimism. I'd go as far as saying it also helped give the sense of unlimited scope and grandeur. There was nothing that could not be explored; anything was possible. The writers reflected real life issues as well, of course: Lee & Kirby were famous for this; Robert Kanigher wrote a multitude of stories on racism; Otto Binder wrote a multitude of stories on miscommunication between political entities resulting in tremendous loss of life; this list goes on and on. But the general sense of the Silver Age was man could overcome its flaws. The one exception to the rule was probably Steve Ditko.
So anything Morrison does reflects this dichotomy of influences. I actually think Morrison has softened up a bit as hes aged though. He's said as much during the writing of All-Star Superman, which served as a cathartic "letting it go" phase in which he reflected on other things beyond his younger cynicism (influenced by things such as the death of his father, having a longterm loving relationship, etc.).
All that being said, I generally love his work, as I stated above. I think the spirit of it captures the Silver Age, but the nuts & bolts of it is anything but; he's not derivative, rather, he's actually creative.
From: If you don't want my peaches, honey... | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Officer Taylor: And I'd REALLY love to hear from anyone out there who actually liked Final Crisis!
What would you like to hear?
I think FC, when read as a complete story, including the Superman 3D experiment (but not necessarily the Rucka minis,) was a great story. It was the exact opposite of All Star Superman. Here was a story very much a commentary on modern comics, full of the melodrama we've been mired in, struggling to find that bit of hope and joy we all keep wanting in our books.
Seeing Darkseid's subversive, grounded and almost urbane conquest of the earth was frightening and disturbing. The unternet is used to broadcast the anti-life equation to EVERYONE! Let's face it- we are all connected these days. The boundaries of reality collapse and worlds collide as story itself become weak and corrupted by something as evil as Darkseid winning. Every time we've seen Darkseid, he's defeated, you have to wonder how bad ass could he be? Now we know- his very existence is poison.
Superman, the champion of worlds (universes really) has to struggle, beyond his might, to grasp concepts on a GOD-LIKE level. The battle isn't for a soul, it's for IDEA.
I do think it was a grand undertaking, and Grant could have done a better job (maybe the storytelling of the art too.) But it was very enjoyable read.
[ May 06, 2010, 05:30 PM: Message edited by: CJ Taylor ]
From: Denver, CO | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ceej, I will confess that Final Crisis had a few moments and scenes within it that worked for me. The problem was that they were few and far between and often went too long without follow-up.
Maybe part of the problem was the story was too BIG to be told in 7 issues, which may also be borne out with what I've heard is the essential nature of the Superman Beyond mini. If understanding or getting full enjoyment of the core story hinges upon reading what is supposed to be an auxiliary tie-in, then the core series would have to be considered a failure. I don't own and haven't read Superman Beyond, so I can only assume that what CJ and other reviewers hint at is true regarding its status as an essential piece of the puzzle.
Blackest Night had the reverse problem...it was too long in contrast to its story content. But none of its tie-ins were essential to the main story. If you just bought BN 1-8, I know that the reader woudn't be lost or feel they've missed something key to the story.
Of course, Final Crisis was also incredibly LATE, so it doesn't help the reader grasp Grant's concepts and retain the continuity when there are big delays throughout. Choosing J.G. Jones as artist was a mistake from the get-go. His track record spelled doom for FC being on time before issue one was ever published. Ivan Reis on BN was a sign from the beginning that BN wasn't gonna have that problem.
But even subtracting the delays and the Superman Beyond problems, Grant's script lacked clarity and suffered from rushed or incomplete characterization. Those are always the two big problems I've had with Grant's work as a whole. It's like I have to be on 'shrooms to see what he's doing while wondering why I should care about the characters in the first place!
Again, has anyone read Alan Moore's Promethea series? It's a textbook example of how a series can be both high concept and comprehensible while also giving you involving, sympathetic characters! It's an Alan Moore book that uses Morrison-like imagination but totally shows Morrison how it's done!
-------------------- "Suck it, depressos!"--M. Lash
From: The Underbelly of Society | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Never read it, actually. Have always meant to get around to it but still have not. I missed the boat on most of Moore's Image stuff and only have started working backwards toward in recent years...
Superman Beyond was actually pretty awesome and I think works great without FC. FC, however, needs it. I found FC to be a pretty boring event that was basically a waste of time. Maybe I'll reread and give it a second look--in the year 2017. LW posters, you can hold me to that then, but until then, I want to forget about it.
From: If you don't want my peaches, honey... | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Final Crisis only really works with Superman Beyond (and Submit) - basically everything that's in the Hardcover. I loved FC, but can understand why people had issues with it and I hold it up as Exhibit A when it comes to how a great story can be deflated by external influences in the comic world. With FC you had:
- A years worth of stories and countless tie-ins leading up to it that ultimately had nothing to do with the story and even worse contradicted it. Shameless attempt by DC to cash in without regard for the story and setting up their readers to be confused and angry.
- Increasing delays. Obviously not the first book, or even the first event book to do so, but with such a complex story it created a sense of "Stalled out"
- Publishing what were essentially three chapters of the book as spin-offs and not indicating how essential they were. "Submit" gave a better idea of the world after Anti-Life, which seems glossed over otherwise in the series proper leading the reader to shrug it off, and the entire last half of issue #7 makes NO sense without "Superman Beyond" to provide context around who the Monitors or Mandrakk really are.
All of these factors lay outside the story itself, but are legitimate reasons for the audience to be upset and not enjoy the story.
From: Moncton, New Brunswick, Canada | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Damn! FC needs "Submit" as well? That's just piss-poor storytelling! I don't really care what you do with all the tie-ins, but if the core story suffers because you didn't buy certain tie-ins, it's inexcusable!
Yes, Blackest Night milked the HELL outta the tie-ins, but NOT A SINGLE ONE was essential reading! GL and GLC had some great between-issue stories and what essentially amount to DVD deleted scenes, but I'm absolutely sure you could read and enjoy BN without them just as you could enjoy the Lord of the Rings films in their theatrical versions without ever watching the extended editions.
I had been thinking that maybe I would re-read FC at some point and see how it works read all together with a fresh look, but now--I'd have to buy MORE to get the full effect?!?! WTF!!!
Stupid Infinite Crisis had the opposite problem: Something like FIVE miniseries lead up to it, don't come to a definite close and become parts of the plot to it! More than all the deaths, villainizations of former good guys and retreading stories, that was just damn unforgivable! I read OMAC Project and the Donna Troy thing, so I was completely LOST by the elements from all those other minis that I didn't care to purchase! It was damned confusing and left me feeling like an absolute CHUMP for buying this crap!
By comparison to IC and FC, Blackest Night comes out smelling like an effin' ROSE! Yes, you could argue that the story is incomplete with the segue into Brightest Day, but I'd argue BD is accessible and looks to be its own thing and have its own hook. And BN did build and resolve its own conflict internally. Other than being too long, I'd say it was a big improvement.
As for Marvel, I have no real comment on the crossovers themselves. I didn't buy or read Civil War, Secret Invasion or Siege, so I can't evaluate them. I can, however, evaluate what crossovers and shared storylines have done to books I loved. Those and price factors have lead me to cut my Marvels on the pull list down to three. By comparison, I get in the neighborhood of 20-25 DCU books.
-------------------- "Suck it, depressos!"--M. Lash
From: The Underbelly of Society | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'd really recommend the Superman Beyond issues, OT/Lard Lad, as based on previous discussions it seems it would be right up your ally. The last page is just killer and had me cheering.
Yes it's chalk full of heady ideas and crazy metatextual commentary (there's a scene where Superman literally reaches out to the reader), but it really does pull the whole thing together and meshed quite nicely with "All Star Superman" as well, in a themeatic sense.
Plus you get Captain Marvel, Dr. Manhattan, Superman, Ultraman and Nazi Superman all trying to work together (plus Merryman), how cool is that?
Hyperpath: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic | Subscribe To Topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
). Morrison, like the other writers who crossed the pond in the 80's and 90's are very much a product of the Thatcher era. They often have a pessimistic view stemming from a sense of betrayal they felt during the Thatcher years. I've read quite a few great interviews with them to see that (Morrison, Moore, Ennis, etc.).![[Wink]](wink.gif)
