Legion World Forums LEGION COMPANION Dr. Gym'll's Cultural Rarities "This is not the Marvel I grew up with."

That was a quote from Lightning Lad on another thread here, and I thought it would make a good topic for some insightful discussion. So, what do you think about Marvel now vs. Marvel 10, 20, 30, or even 40 years back??? Why do you like it better or less? Which era of Marvel appeals to you the most, and for what reason? Why is it "not the Marvel you grew up with," and is that a good thing or a bad thing?

I think one of the problems with a topic like this is that we're no longer the same readers that we were then -- anything one experiences when you grow up is never going to be the same as anything else that comes later on.

That said, I like Marvel more now for the most part compared to the era I grew up with (the 80's). That was the time when Spidey, Cap, Thor, Hulk and Iron Man all got new (temporary) looks, Secret Wars, The New U etc... While there were some series I enjoyed, nothing compared to the X-Men at the time (I don't think I bought any DC at that time). Now, I enjoy the regular Marvel books more than the X-family (it seriously went downhill in the 90's imo).

While some people criticize Marvel for playing fast and loose with continuity all the time, it's also freed them to do more interesting things, take more chances. Compared to DC things at Marvel have always been darker, which I can definitely enjoy at times (Daredevil, The Ultimates, The Inhumans etc).

Artwise, Marvel was annoying for awhile with Liefeld and the Jim Lee clones, but they're getting away from that. The pseudo-manga style is kinda annoying too (just because it was second-rate for the most part -- actual manga is great), but at least it's not the "house style" anymore.

So for the most part I think it's gotten better. Nothing can replace those feelings I first had when it was all still fairly new -- it doesn't take too long to get jaded once you get jerked around once too often -- but for the most part, the stuff that they're putting out now is a lot better.

Manga. The final nail. Sorry, but that is one style I just don't like.

My Marvel was the one that existed in the late 70's early 80's. Prior to having to buy multiple covers to collect one issue of a comic. Before you had to read 15 X titles just to finish one story. I used to read The X-Men (Uncanny, the only one), then the New Mutants when it came out, The Avengers, Fantastic Four (the last time I truly liked Byrne's work), Amazing Spider-Man, anything by Jim Starlin. A few others I've forgotten over the years. And I liked the New Universe (Starbrand and DP7). And The 'Nam.

Don't get me wrong, I do enjoy a number of Marvel titles still. The Avengers, Ultimate X-Men, Exiles, The Inhumans (just finished the first 2 issues), Ultimates. I'm just lamenting the fact they are not as memorable as they used to be. But then I'm in my late 30's and those days where my nostalgic period. Maybe when I'm in my 60's I'll recall with fondness how Cap beat the shit out of Giant-Man because Hank abused his wife with a bunch of ants. On second thought, I doubt it.

I don't know if the stuff being put out now is better or not. Its different for a different time. I probably wouldn't enjoy the same style of writing I did in the 80's as I do now. Like all other art forms, comic books have to evolve or die. So I can't fault Marvel for not wanting to go bankrupt, again, but I can grow tiresome of its blatant media whoring. We'll probably get a couple more good movies made out of comic books (and probably not one of them will be DC) before it all turns to crap. But then Marvel would have mades it millions and be on to the next thing.

And I really shouldn't try to be coherent at 4:00 a.m. when I've been up for 24 hours.

Your post makes me think of one thing that's probly worse now compared to the Marvel I read when I was a kid (which is true thoughout the industry) which is that titles used to take more time to develop stories. Creators used to stay longer on a book and there wasn't such a need to have self-contained storyarcs that turn everything upside down ever year (especially true of Marvel since they're now in the business of putting out tpb's in bookstores).

An excellent point, Drake.

I had given up on Marvels entirely in the '90s, but currently I read DAREDEVIL, HULK and THOR, three titles which have a very different approach to the heroes and their places in the Marvel U. These characters are not being interpreted by the creators in the same way that they were when I was reading comics as a child, but knowing that going in has enabled me to experience them anew.

On the other hand, I picked up a few of the X-titles and flipped through them at the store. (My standard test for buying a comic: Read the first couple of pages; if you want to read more, buy the book.) They seemed very simplistic and unoriginal.

I was looking forward to Kurt Busiek's AVENGERS when it was launched six years ago, but gave up on it after 19 issues. (And it was only because of my love for the Avengers that I lasted that long.) It was formulaic and average. Plotwise, it was very well-done, but I found myself thinking I'd read it all before. I have not been back to the AVENGERS since, even though Busiek has moved on; I'm just not curious enough to check it out and, also, I believe that in some ways you truly can't go home again. (THE LEGION is a partial exception, but then it's also changed as radically as DD, HULK and THOR have.)

Funny, I loved Busiek's Avengers. Maybe I don't like change.

I think the fact that Marvel decide not to come to the San Diego Comic-Con this year says a lot. The people in charge of the company don't care about the fans or the characters and it shows in the tone of the stories and series they're trying to cram down our throats.

Did Marvel have some official explanation for not having a presence there? It seems odd to me -- you'd think they'd want to promote their stuff at least.

I wanted to love Busiek's work on AVENGERS. I really did. He worked very hard to give fans what they wanted (he was posting on an Avengers fan website, soliciting opinions months before the launch). But I guess I was at a point in my life where I wanted to read something original. Battles with Ultron and the Grim Reaper had been done before. Wanda being torn between Vision and Simon had been done before. As crucial to the Avengers as Thor, Iron Man and Cap are, nothing had been done to deepen or change their relationships. (Kurt had introduced the idea of Iron Man, a science-based hero, being uncomfortable with Thor's mythology-based existence, but nothing was really done with it that I recall.)

Sometimes an idea would be introduced -- and this is nothing new for AVENGERS -- then quickly dropped or transferred to a different book. Ms. Marvel (or Warbird, as she was calling herself) became an alcoholic, so she was dropped from the book and picked up in IRON MAN. I was reading IM, too, at the time (though briefly), but I just wasn't interested in migrating subplots. I guess I truly had seen it all before.

I think Marvel wants to take a more movie-studio approach to everything they do. Very little feedback and/or interaction with the fans, except through the almighty dollar. How many times does Harvey Weinstein go out and talk to the public? It's much the same thing.

And yes, it does suck.

Oh, and on other topics on this thread, I went out and bought the issue with Lorna Dane in the aftermath of her "wedding" with Havok, and as far as they had her wearing the Magneto helmet, I think they just wanted to see how it looked, just in case it becomes her permanent headgear.

Magneto she ain't.