|
Post by G on Jul 17, 2011 9:10:32 GMT -5
The Amazing Spider-Man vol. 1 #1-25 were incredibly stupid and so was Claremont's run on The Uncanny X-Men. Obviously compared to what CAN be done today, ASM #1-25 would look pretty stupid, but for it's day it was pretty groundbreaking stuff. You have to remember that this was back in the day when DC was making single issue stories that might have featured Batmite or Krypto the Superdog. DC was just plain corny back then. Marvel was putting out some real continuation and drama that could bring you back for the next issue. For its day, it was good stuff. Compare it to today and it looks cheesy. Also, I don't know about his whole run because I didn't read it all. I do remember a time when I felt like Claremont needed to go from the X-Men. But I'd have to argue his Byrne days were pretty rock solid. Again this was stuff that was a step above the rest of the crowd and different from everything else for its time. No team book was as compelling for a 3 or 4 year period there then the X-Men. They had the magic that other comics wished it had. I think once Byrne left though, the thrill started leaving. Other than a few bright spots here and there, the rest of his time was pretty forgettable.
|
|
|
Post by defiant1 on Jul 17, 2011 9:26:20 GMT -5
The Amazing Spider-Man vol. 1 #1-25 were incredibly stupid and so was Claremont's run on The Uncanny X-Men. Obviously compared to what CAN be done today, ASM #1-25 would look pretty stupid, but for it's day it was pretty groundbreaking stuff. You have to remember that this was back in the day when DC was making single issue stories that might have featured Batmite or Krypto the Superdog. DC was just plain corny back then. Marvel was putting out some real continuation and drama that could bring you back for the next issue. For its day, it was good stuff. Compare it to today and it looks cheesy. Also, I don't know about his whole run because I didn't read it all. I do remember a time when I felt like Claremont needed to go from the X-Men. But I'd have to argue his Byrne days were pretty rock solid. Again this was stuff that was a step above the rest of the crowd and different from everything else for its time. No team book was as compelling for a 3 or 4 year period there then the X-Men. They had the magic that other comics wished it had. I think once Byrne left though, the thrill started leaving. Other than a few bright spots here and there, the rest of his time was pretty forgettable. I was never a fan of Claremont. I thought the Byrne issues were decent. The Brood saga was horrible. Days of Future Past ranks as a top effort. Unfortunately, they kept trying to bring all that back and try to revisit it. They should have left it alone. df1
|
|
|
Post by bigw1966 on Jul 17, 2011 9:52:23 GMT -5
You also have to remember, that Byrne was an uncredited co-plotter on a majority of his run with Claremont. They did not like giving Artists any credit for that at the time. Also, Byrne in general is probably a better writer than Claremont who is mainly just reptetive and verbose.
|
|
|
Post by cyberstrike on Jul 17, 2011 11:08:41 GMT -5
It's also Marvel, as well. Steranko's Nick Fury, Agent of S.H.I.E.L.D and The Amazing Spider-Man vol. 1 #1-25 were incredibly stupid and so was Claremont's run on The Uncanny X-Men. Kirby and Simon's The Fighting American and Jim Starlin's runs on Captain Marvel and Warlock were the great books from that era. Warlock by Starlin was horrid. Never read Steranko's run on S.H.I.E.L.D. I don't care much about Golden Age. Marvel was good for it's day. Times were simpler back then. People were more concerned about racial and war issues. Divorce was a new concept that society had not embraced. df1 Starlin took a nobody of character and made him into a complex 3-Dimensional character that deals with fanatical religion, freewill, fate, transcendence and even suicide. Do yourself a big favor and don't read Steranko's run on Nick Fury: Agent of S.H.E.I.L.D. it's a headache. The Fighting American was a 50s character that was a head of the times by about 60 years. If done right a re-imagined set in today's world would be very cool and very relevant to our world. The 60s and 70s were no more simpler than say the 80s and 90s the only reason why anyone would say that is because they were a kid/teenager in those decades and 90% of kids/teenagers see the world is a simple terms.
|
|
|
Post by cyberstrike on Jul 17, 2011 11:24:09 GMT -5
so was Claremont's run on The Uncanny X-Men. Also, I don't know about his whole run because I didn't read it all. I do remember a time when I felt like Claremont needed to go from the X-Men. But I'd have to argue his Byrne days were pretty rock solid. Again this was stuff that was a step above the rest of the crowd and different from everything else for its time. No team book was as compelling for a 3 or 4 year period there then the X-Men. They had the magic that other comics wished it had. I think once Byrne left though, the thrill started leaving. Other than a few bright spots here and there, the rest of his time was pretty forgettable. Claremont has only written 1 great story in whole career and that is the X-Men: God Loves, Man Kills graphic novel. Everything else he has written sucks. Frankly if he were retired after that he could have at least went out on high note. What I don't like about him and long-running The Transformers scribe Simon Furman, is that a LOT of fans think that they should be the ONLY writers to write The Uncanny X-Men and The Transformers respectfully and that no one else should. Which I say is bullshit. Claremont wrote his damn masterpiece and he should have quit and went out on top. Furman has had written a lot of great The Transformers stories but his day is over and he should move on. They each offer absolutly NOTHING new to either series (or franchise) except for an excuse in nostiglia which never lasts long. Having some new talent that can bring fresh ideas and new enegery to a stale series can revive a dying series like what Peter David did with The Incredibe Hulk and Aquaman or what Shane McCarthy and Mike Costa did on IDW's G1 Transformers universe.
|
|
|
Post by defiant1 on Jul 17, 2011 11:37:06 GMT -5
Warlock by Starlin was horrid. Never read Steranko's run on S.H.I.E.L.D. I don't care much about Golden Age. Marvel was good for it's day. Times were simpler back then. People were more concerned about racial and war issues. Divorce was a new concept that society had not embraced. df1 Starlin took a nobody of character and made him into a complex 3-Dimensional character that deals with fanatical religion, freewill, fate, transcendence and even suicide. Do yourself a big favor and don't read Steranko's run on Nick Fury: Agent of S.H.E.I.L.D. it's a headache. The Fighting American was a 50s character that was a head of the times by about 60 years. If done right a re-imagined set in today's world would be very cool and very relevant to our world. The 60s and 70s were no more simpler than say the 80s and 90s the only reason why anyone would say that is because they were a kid/teenager in those decades and 90% of kids/teenagers see the world is a simple terms. Your evaluation is wrong. I was a teen in the 70's and I remember the good and bad quite vividly. The 60's and 70's were complicated from a political perspective. From a day to day living perspective, they were quite simple and predictable. The technology explosion in the 80's complicated things greatly. Credit checks were instant. Cell phones took business and family matters that were tied to a land line and brought them to a person's car. People started multitasking and trying to process information their full waking day. People were happy not having their hand on information every waking moment. The family unit was still pretty strong. A gay superhero would have been rejected, not applauded and hyped as a means to sell a comic. The Chinese, Russians and Vietnamese were the bad guys. We didn't yet understand what was going on in the middle east. We are all wired in now and imputing different information from a multitude of sources. Back in the 70's entire sections of society were on the same page interpreting the news the same way. Yes, people differed, but you were usually either pro-Vietnam or anti-war altogether. People in the community were either black or white. If someone was Spanish, they were usually treated as white, not Spanish. Things were far more simple back then. I'm not actually saying the 70's were better. The gas crisis sucked. The economy sucked. All that aside though, it was simpler and easier to interact. People actually knew their neighbors back then. They worked in their yard more. Mom's stayed at home and raised kids. People are far more detached from personal contact these days. df1
|
|
|
Post by G on Jul 17, 2011 18:00:31 GMT -5
Also, I don't know about his whole run because I didn't read it all. I do remember a time when I felt like Claremont needed to go from the X-Men. But I'd have to argue his Byrne days were pretty rock solid. Again this was stuff that was a step above the rest of the crowd and different from everything else for its time. No team book was as compelling for a 3 or 4 year period there then the X-Men. They had the magic that other comics wished it had. I think once Byrne left though, the thrill started leaving. Other than a few bright spots here and there, the rest of his time was pretty forgettable. Claremont has only written 1 great story in whole career and that is the X-Men: God Loves, Man Kills graphic novel. Everything else he has written sucks. Frankly if he were retired after that he could have at least went out on high note. What I don't like about him and long-running The Transformers scribe Simon Furman, is that a LOT of fans think that they should be the ONLY writers to write The Uncanny X-Men and The Transformers respectfully and that no one else should. Which I say is bullshit. Claremont wrote his damn masterpiece and he should have quit and went out on top. Furman has had written a lot of great The Transformers stories but his day is over and he should move on. They each offer absolutly NOTHING new to either series (or franchise) except for an excuse in nostiglia which never lasts long. Having some new talent that can bring fresh ideas and new enegery to a stale series can revive a dying series like what Peter David did with The Incredibe Hulk and Aquaman or what Shane McCarthy and Mike Costa did on IDW's G1 Transformers universe. I am not a Claremont defender. I NEVER thought he should be the only writer of the X-Men. I think he stayed on X-Men too long and milked his name on them but then again, he was making a paycheck back then. Who could blame him? I'm not saying it brought anything new to the table except it was a good run of comics, but I personally loved the Byrne years and I think Mike hit it on the head that Byrne probably co-plotted a lot of the issues and brought a lot to the table. Once Byrne left, I always felt X-Men sucked. People seem to resent the X-Men from back then because it was so successful. Today the run would have been better than average. But back then it was flowing better than just about anything. I certainly remember the X-Men being on top. It wasn't a mirage. It was real. But once that bird was cooked, it was cooked. I think as DF1 put it, Days of Future Past was a peak moment and underrated compared to the Dark Phoenix saga. In any event, its really all just a matter of people's opinions as to what is or was great. We all seem to get touched by different things and turned off by other things. No right or wrong. Just opinions.
|
|
|
Post by G on Mar 19, 2013 18:05:42 GMT -5
I was getting ready to post a new topic and this title caught my eye. Even though I wrote it, I couldn't remember what it was about. I just reread the thread. Man, that was a good back and forth! Too bad it ended. I don't hardly think anyone paid any attention to anyone's points and each one of us thought our points were dead on Science! Damn it's hard to have people agree on things. People were spewing shit and I thought they lost their mind. Other things were said and I thought genius! And yet, it didn't seem like any of us gave a damn. We all just wanted to beat each other up. Sometimes talking on message boards is like putting yourself out their for ridicule. When you bring something to light, people want to bash you for having a coherent thought. Meanwhile (dramatic pause)....people go around and think about what irks them all the time and keep it to themselves. When someone posts on the internet things that they exactly feel the same way about, instead of saying "yeah, yeah...you're right man, that pisses me off too!" the inclination is more likely a thought of "I need to think of something that will shut that bastard up!" There is no appreciation for message board admins. If you post, you get slapped for having a thought to provide discussion. If you don't post, your board just dies a slow painful death. I think it is best just to ignore everything and as DF1 told me once...."Just treat it as your personal diary". Instead of thinking to myself.... "I need to think of something to shut him the fuck up"......I'd rather say publicly in agreement.... Yeah, yeah....that's the ticket!
|
|
|
Post by defiant1 on Mar 20, 2013 20:09:14 GMT -5
I was getting ready to post a new topic and this title caught my eye. Even though I wrote it, I couldn't remember what it was about. I just reread the thread. Man, that was a good back and forth! Too bad it ended. I don't hardly think anyone paid any attention to anyone's points and each one of us thought our points were dead on Science! Damn it's hard to have people agree on things. People were spewing shit and I thought they lost their mind. Other things were said and I thought genius! And yet, it didn't seem like any of us gave a damn. We all just wanted to beat each other up. Sometimes talking on message boards is like putting yourself out their for ridicule. When you bring something to light, people want to bash you for having a coherent thought. Meanwhile (dramatic pause)....people go around and think about what irks them all the time and keep it to themselves. When someone posts on the internet things that they exactly feel the same way about, instead of saying "yeah, yeah...you're right man, that pisses me off too!" the inclination is more likely a thought of "I need to think of something that will shut that bastard up!" There is no appreciation for message board admins. If you post, you get slapped for having a thought to provide discussion. If you don't post, your board just dies a slow painful death. I think it is best just to ignore everything and as DF1 told me once...."Just treat it as your personal diary". Instead of thinking to myself.... "I need to think of something to shut him the fuck up"......I'd rather say publicly in agreement.... Yeah, yeah....that's the ticket! People want raw information. I try to post that. I do like to counter sheep-like mindsets with that of a new way to look at things. Certain personality types are more suited to be an admin. Cafeteria food is bland because it strives to appeal to the largest audience. There aren't a lot of spices because some people have sensitivities to them. I don't like cafeteria food for that reason. In a similar manner, the comic messageboards that appeal to the largest audience are going to bore me. The members are not going to be discerning of good and bad very well. They will just go through the motions and respond with generic, boring, and often useless comments. df1
|
|