• 77 results
  • 1
  • 2
#51 Posted by krspaceT (1509 posts) - - Show Bio

@tdk_1997 said:

Interesting thread and I do agree with most things you've said but I disagree with the Snyder and Hickman arguments.For me Hickman was only good when he was writing the Fantastic Four,right now his Avengers is crap for me while SNyder can't do a good Batman comic even if he wants to.

I admit I only know Hickman by reputation, seeing as the only Marvel Book I was getting before I got sent to a land without comic book stores was Wood's X-men. But I happen to think that Synder is a pretty good writer myself. He captures detective elements of the Dark Knight pretty well from what I saw in the pre Damian death issues and the Gates of Gotham series, and he seems to be capturing Superman and his reporter style well. So, that's why I argued he could do Green Lantern or Flash well due to how they are police, though I think he could probably do a decent Spiderman as well now that I think about it.

@lvenger said:

This is a really interesting topic that has generated some nice discussion. I do agree with the OP to a large extent on the matter at hand. For instance, though I'm not a huge fan of Snyder's Batman work, I really like what he's doing with Superman Unchained which is a totally different style of comic to what he usually writes. Similarly, Kieron Gilleon's Thor and Journey into Mystery runs were great but his Iron Man series has sucked hard so far. And I just dislike Fraction and Bendis generally. Even with series they're supposedly good at like Hawkeye and Ultimate Spider-Man don't interest me much.

Lets hope everyone remembers that Marvel Now has misses next time one complains about the New 52 having bad writers. And perhaps this just means that Gilleon is best when he gets to play with mythology. Perhaps he would do a decent Hercules or Wonder Woman, while tech based heroes like Batman and Iron Man are not compatible

@veshark said:

Bendis is only tolerable while writing Ultimate Spider-Man. I feel like tearing my head off when I read his Avengers stuff, Alias, or anything else Marvel-related by that man, even books like Ultimate X-Men. USM is the only time I feel that Bendis is comfortably in his element. The man's writing is just better in small doses. When I think USM, I think of lots of back-and-forth dialogue, teens acting like teens, and just overall fun. Bendis' writing ticks work well in USM because it's all I associate the series with. But bring him over to any other Marvel book and I feel like blowing my brains out.

Though, surprisingly enough, Ultimate Six was actually pretty good. He really toned all the Bendisms down in favor of a more hard-edged almost military type crossover.

Jonathan Hickman and his uber-narrations. The first thing is that the guy really needs to tone down the dramatic captions. To be honest, I love a good number of them. The ending captions for Avengers and New Avengers, the one in the Run epilogue issue of FF, the Ronance issue. Those are great. But sometimes the man just goes overboard. Books like F4 and Ultimate Comics Ultimates are when he uses them sparingly, and they work well. But in Avengers I just find myself going, is it really necessary?

Another thing is that he needs emotion and characters to ground his work. F4 and Ultimates? Solid character work mixed with his high-concept ideas. But try reading SHIELD or Manhattan Projects, and all you're left with is complete apathy for the book and its protagonists. I'm a fan of Hickman's work, but it only works when he's able to mix his penchant for epic science and the evolution of man and great ideas and what-not....with some modicum of characterization.

Mark Millar. Millar. Millar. MILLAR. Man....when this dude actually gives a crap about his writing, he churns out some of the best comics I have ever read. I don't care what his detractors say; but Ultimates/Ultimates 2, Authority, and Ultimate X-Men will always have a special place in my heart. I've also heard good stuff about his Swamp Thing, Old Man Logan, and Adventures of Superman stuff. When he actually cares about his writing, he produces some of the most blockbuster big-scale battles and thoughtful characterization. All those annoying tics (like the over-descriptive dialogue or penchant for over-the-top carnage) trigger emotions instead of feeling like throwaway shock tactics.

But when it comes to rubbish like Kick-Ass, Nemesis, Ultimate Comics Avengers, Super-Crooks. You can tell he's just putting words on pages to earn some money. None of these books feel worth your time, just spectacle and pretty art with zero substance story-wise. And all those annoying tics start giving him his reputation for pointless violence, crassness, and misogyny (that and his comments, though....). Also, the man should never be allowed to write sci-fi comics, because his F4 run was just a chore to read through, and completely devoid of any momentum.

It helps at least, that a lot of Bendis's series he writes have characters who do quip like a young Spiderman: older Spiderman for one, and younger X-Men like young Iceman who is a comical character

And it almost seems that everyone seems to hate whoever is writing Avengers pretty hugely. Heck, it seems to get worse as the Johns hate on his Justice League run tempered down after Throne of Atlantis.

Hey, who knows: perhaps people give Ultimate Spiderman a pass because Bendis created him and defined the story perfectly, or as close to it as possible. Same with Hickman and the FF and Johns on Green Lantern; if a writer stays on a title long enough, few fans are willing to diss it.

But that becomes a curse: people will always expect that Johns will always do a Green Lantern to the characters he 'revamps'. His Teen Titans run is generally agreed to be the second best (Behind the immortal Perez/Wolfman one), but people diss it for not being as good as his GL run. Perhaps Bendis and Hickman, as well as Remender and every other good writer, has that problem.

But even then: perhaps its easier for a generalist writer like Johns to adapt to other types of characters: being able to go from writing young heroes like the Teen Titans to writing old hip people like he did with JSA to his current Aquaman run.

How well can Bendis, Hickman and Remender write when out of their comfort zones: be it Ultimate Spiderman and his quips, the Fantastic Four and their great sci fi feel and Remender and the gritty Uncanny X-Force.

#52 Edited by Squares (8392 posts) - - Show Bio

@x35 said:

How anyone can say Alias was anything but horrible is beyond me. How can anyone describe a book that is mostly go nowhere inner-monologues fettered with swear words while an ugly (in every sense of the word) woman is having a crap as good? And that was like how they started almost every issue. And when it's not doing that it's painstakingly inserting Jones into continuity or having her having grotesque sex with things. All the while swearing.

Wow, I totally didn't notice this post until now. Man, you must have seriously high standards of beauty if you think Jessica Jones is ugly...

Note to self: anal sex is apparently 'grotesque'. And Luke Cage is now an object.

#53 Posted by X35 (5981 posts) - - Show Bio

@squares said:

@x35 said:

How anyone can say Alias was anything but horrible is beyond me. How can anyone describe a book that is mostly go nowhere inner-monologues fettered with swear words while an ugly (in every sense of the word) woman is having a crap as good? And that was like how they started almost every issue. And when it's not doing that it's painstakingly inserting Jones into continuity or having her having grotesque sex with things. All the while swearing.

Wow, I totally didn't notice this post until now. Man, you must have seriously high standards of beauty if you think Jessica Jones is ugly...

Foul-mouthed chain-smoking women with horrible personalities who spend most their time on the can are not attractive.

#54 Posted by entropy_aegis (15429 posts) - - Show Bio

Jeph Loeb and sensible writing.

#55 Posted by knighthood (1736 posts) - - Show Bio

@dabee said:

Alan Moore is only good at writing amazing stuff. He's not very good at writing bad stuff.

I dunno. I've seen some questionable Moore stuff. Howzabout Moore can't write good magical porn?

I like Bendis when he is working with a group of characters. I'm uncertain how he'd do with a solo book (no I haven't read his Ultimate Spider-Man). Same thing with Lemire. He is amazing as long as he has a good supporting cast.

Hickman cannot do a comic without a good artist since his writing style demands that the artist tell a good portion of the story.

#56 Posted by TheAcidSkull (18673 posts) - - Show Bio

Greg Pak has written an awesome batman and an awesome Cho thus far. he's good with every character, sure hulk was somthing out of the ordinary that might never be replicated again, but still it'll be good.

#57 Edited by Squares (8392 posts) - - Show Bio

@x35 said:

@squares said:

@x35 said:

How anyone can say Alias was anything but horrible is beyond me. How can anyone describe a book that is mostly go nowhere inner-monologues fettered with swear words while an ugly (in every sense of the word) woman is having a crap as good? And that was like how they started almost every issue. And when it's not doing that it's painstakingly inserting Jones into continuity or having her having grotesque sex with things. All the while swearing.

Wow, I totally didn't notice this post until now. Man, you must have seriously high standards of beauty if you think Jessica Jones is ugly...

Foul-mouthed chain-smoking women with horrible personalities who spend most their time on the can are not attractive.

She's depicted as physically attractive, at the least, yet you describe her as 'ugly in every sense of the word'.

#58 Posted by krspaceT (1509 posts) - - Show Bio

Jeph Loeb and sensible writing.

The whole, 'complain about the author because you believe s/he sucks' ban is still in effect.

#59 Edited by FadeToBlackBolt (23238 posts) - - Show Bio

@krspacet said:

@entropy_aegis said:

Jeph Loeb and sensible writing.

The whole, 'complain about the author because you believe s/he sucks' ban is still in effect.

Then don't make a thread using the term "incompatible".

And you can't ban opinions, you just get the right to complain about people having them.

#60 Edited by RaynorJ (1498 posts) - - Show Bio

Yea like Mark Waid couldn't write a Hulk story to save his life, Banner one on the other hand...

#61 Edited by Extremis (3363 posts) - - Show Bio

Yeah I'd say so for sure. It's interesting when we get new creators on books they've never been on before becuse it offers something new. But sometimes a person's approach just isn't suited to a character. It's hard to pin these things down though.

For example, Rick Remender turned Captain America into an odd, quirky sci fi book for a year. And it worked amazingly. His run has made me love the character. But his run is far different than any run that's come before and fairly out of the ordinary for a Cap run from what I understand.

Now the reason why I think it works is two fold. First, it's something knew we've never seen before. He put Cap in situations and relationships we've never seen. And the only reason it works, and this is important as this is the second criteria for such a change to be successful, it's that he never loses sight of Steve Rogers. By this I mean it is unquestionably a Cap book as thru all weird stuff going on in Dimension Z, we know this to be Steve Rogers. Remender never loses the voice of the character, and all this sci fi stuff he's created is a way to reach the heart of the character, just in a way we've never seen before.

So, in short, yes I think some people can miss the mark on a character. Not because the type of story the tell, but if it misrepresents the character or misunderstands their motives. If a creator is true to the character, they can do pretty much anything. And we've seen some of the best runs or graphic novels on characters that do that exact thing and are renowned precisely because they push the envelope while always remaining true to the character(s).

#62 Posted by Billy Batson (58293 posts) - - Show Bio

he's good with every character

Darkseid disagrees.

BB

#63 Posted by TheAcidSkull (18673 posts) - - Show Bio

@billy_batson: His darkseid was fine, it's the pacing of the story that ruined it :P

#64 Edited by Vance Astro (91403 posts) - - Show Bio

@wolverine08 said:

Good thread. IMO, Brian Michael Bendis is only good when he's working with street levelers.

I disagree. Although his solo street level hero books are his best work, his Avengers (New & Mighty) was amazing before the events started.

Moderator
#65 Posted by Billy Batson (58293 posts) - - Show Bio

@billy_batson: His darkseid was fine, it's the pacing of the story that ruined it :P

Nah, he tossed all of the Kirby stuff out of the window.

BB

#66 Posted by Vance Astro (91403 posts) - - Show Bio

@extremis said:

Yeah I'd say so for sure. It's interesting when we get new creators on books they've never been on before becuse it offers something new. But sometimes a person's approach just isn't suited to a character. It's hard to pin these things down though.

For example, Rick Remender turned Captain America into an odd, quirky sci fi book for a year. And it worked amazingly. His run has made me love the character. But his run is far different than any run that's come before and fairly out of the ordinary for a Cap run from what I understand.

Now the reason why I think it works is two fold. First, it's something knew we've never seen before. He put Cap in situations and relationships we've never seen. And the only reason it works, and this is important as this is the second criteria for such a change to be successful, it's that he never loses sight of Steve Rogers. By this I mean it is unquestionably a Cap book as thru all weird stuff going on in Dimension Z, we know this to be Steve Rogers. Remender never loses the voice of the character, and all this sci fi stuff he's created is a way to reach the heart of the character, just in a way we've never seen before.

So, in short, yes I think some people can miss the mark on a character. Not because the type of story the tell, but if it misrepresents the character or misunderstands their motives. If a creator is true to the character, they can do pretty much anything. And we've seen some of the best runs or graphic novels on characters that do that exact thing and are renowned precisely because they push the envelope while always remaining true to the character(s).

Remender's Cap is definitely better than I expected. His Secret Avengers was lackluster though.

Moderator
#67 Posted by TheAcidSkull (18673 posts) - - Show Bio
#68 Edited by Billy Batson (58293 posts) - - Show Bio

The New Gods were gods before and now they're aliens, the New Gods are now powered by belief that wasn't there before, Pak retconned the characters' family relations to be different than before, he turned Darkseid into a Superman villain and bunch of other stuff.

BB

#69 Posted by TheAcidSkull (18673 posts) - - Show Bio

The New Gods were gods before and now they're aliens, the New Gods are now powered by belief that wasn't there before, Pak retconned the characters' family relations to be different than before, he turned Darkseid into a Superman villain and bunch of other stuff.

BB

i see.

Zod was cool though.

#70 Edited by Extremis (3363 posts) - - Show Bio

@vance_astro: never read his Secret Avengers, but I love his run on Cap.

What do you think of his Uncanny Avengers? I read up to issue 8 and had to drop something so it got the ax. The story was good from what I remember (aside from that wonky narration which seemed to polarize reader opinions a bit). That Cassady art was subpar, and I mainly didn't like that it didn't have a consistent look.

But that Thor centric issue (#6?) was epic. I could see Remender on Thor in the future.

#71 Edited by Vance Astro (91403 posts) - - Show Bio

@extremis said:

@vance_astro: never read his Secret Avengers, but I love his run on Cap.

What do you think of his Uncanny Avengers? I read up to issue 8 and had to drop something so it got the ax. The story was good from what I remember (aside from that wonky narration which seemed to polarize reader opinions a bit). That Cassady art was subpar, and I mainly didn't like that it didn't have a consistent look.

But that Thor centric issue (#6?) was epic. I could see Remender on Thor in the future.

It was hard to stay interested in Uncanny Avengers. It's hard to even say why I didn't like it. I think the other books I was reading were so much better by comparison that I kind of didn't feel the need to pick it up any more.

Moderator
#72 Edited by Extremis (3363 posts) - - Show Bio

@vance_astro: yeah same here. I wasn't sure that the team had much of an identity early on. So it was kind of hard to know what their purpose was beyond being some kind of PR stunt for human-mutant relations. Looking back I kind of wish I maybe stuck it out as I do really like Remender.

I'd be interested to hear how the title has developed since then. Anyone enjoying Uncanny Avengers?

#73 Posted by Veshark (9058 posts) - - Show Bio

@squares said:

@veshark: Bendis can be good, I think he just needs the right characters to work with. Have you read All-New X-men?

I agree 100% with what you said about Hickman. The guy can do high-concept stuff well, but even then his writing tends to fall flat on occasion.

The less said about Millar, the better. It still kills me that the same guy who wrote Old Man Logan wrote Wanted.

I have read a couple of issues here and there, but honestly at this point, I'm kind of burnt out with the Bendis style of decompressed writing. So many lines of dialogue in his work could just be cut down to fit what is necessary - not what is 'funny' or 'realistic dialogue'. There's a fine line between giving your characters verbal style and being downright annoying.

But I do agree with your sentiment. His USM run, despite my annoyance of his writing tics, is no doubt a solid superhero tale told in long-form. It's also the one comic where I can swallow his style of writing. I have heard that his Daredevil run is superb though.

#74 Edited by Veshark (9058 posts) - - Show Bio
@krspacet said:

It helps at least, that a lot of Bendis's series he writes have characters who do quip like a young Spiderman: older Spiderman for one, and younger X-Men like young Iceman who is a comical character

And it almost seems that everyone seems to hate whoever is writing Avengers pretty hugely. Heck, it seems to get worse as the Johns hate on his Justice League run tempered down after Throne of Atlantis.

Hey, who knows: perhaps people give Ultimate Spiderman a pass because Bendis created him and defined the story perfectly, or as close to it as possible. Same with Hickman and the FF and Johns on Green Lantern; if a writer stays on a title long enough, few fans are willing to diss it.

But that becomes a curse: people will always expect that Johns will always do a Green Lantern to the characters he 'revamps'. His Teen Titans run is generally agreed to be the second best (Behind the immortal Perez/Wolfman one), but people diss it for not being as good as his GL run. Perhaps Bendis and Hickman, as well as Remender and every other good writer, has that problem.

But even then: perhaps its easier for a generalist writer like Johns to adapt to other types of characters: being able to go from writing young heroes like the Teen Titans to writing old hip people like he did with JSA to his current Aquaman run.

How well can Bendis, Hickman and Remender write when out of their comfort zones: be it Ultimate Spiderman and his quips, the Fantastic Four and their great sci fi feel and Remender and the gritty Uncanny X-Force.

Well as I said in my initial post, I tolerate Bendis' writing in USM because it not only fits the characters (like you mentioned), but also because it's the work I most associate with his style. That, and he was actually churning out some pretty solid stories from the series in the run.

I don't think people are simply hating Avengers because of the title itself. People have legitimate quarrels with Hickman's run, and I'm saying that as a big fan of the man. He just seems to have used too big a roster to tell too epic a story, and the Avengers feel less like a superhero team and more like pieces on the chessboard for Hickman to move, to tell a grand space opera. It works sometimes, but also falters at points.

I wouldn't even say that Hickman's FF was his comfort zone or even the run most associated with him (people seem to have almost forgotten it, actually). But what makes it great was that he focused a lot on the family element of the team, giving an aspect of humanity that brought his high-concept ideas to life. Too many of his books like MP, SHIELD, and even Avengers to an extent, feel too emotionally disconnected from its characters, giving the story a dry, kinda hard sci-fi feel. I always feel like Hickman's best work is when he can balance the two extremes of characterization and grand storytelling - and he does this best in books like FF, New Avengers, and Ultimates.

#75 Posted by Vance Astro (91403 posts) - - Show Bio

@extremis said:

@vance_astro: yeah same here. I wasn't sure that the team had much of an identity early on. So it was kind of hard to know what their purpose was beyond being some kind of PR stunt for human-mutant relations. Looking back I kind of wish I maybe stuck it out as I do really like Remender.

I'll get around to reading it in it's entirety at some point but there is so much i'm trying to catch up on as well as reading new comics, I don't really have the time as far as reading is concerned right now.

Moderator
#76 Posted by TDK_1997 (15059 posts) - - Show Bio

@krspacet said:

@tdk_1997 said:

Interesting thread and I do agree with most things you've said but I disagree with the Snyder and Hickman arguments.For me Hickman was only good when he was writing the Fantastic Four,right now his Avengers is crap for me while SNyder can't do a good Batman comic even if he wants to.

I admit I only know Hickman by reputation, seeing as the only Marvel Book I was getting before I got sent to a land without comic book stores was Wood's X-men. But I happen to think that Synder is a pretty good writer myself. He captures detective elements of the Dark Knight pretty well from what I saw in the pre Damian death issues and the Gates of Gotham series, and he seems to be capturing Superman and his reporter style well. So, that's why I argued he could do Green Lantern or Flash well due to how they are police, though I think he could probably do a decent Spiderman as well now that I think about it.

Snyder isn't a bad writer but he's repeating himself just too much.Every story of his exactly the same but with different characters.A big bad thing from the past of a hero comes and is about to destroy him and everything he stands for.His Detective Comics run was the best thing he has ever written about Batman and it was Dick not Bruce.As for his Superman right now it's pretty decent but nothing more.

#77 Edited by krspaceT (1509 posts) - - Show Bio

I mean, lets be honest, if people like Nocenti, Loeb and Lobdell are as bad as everyone thinks....no one would hire them. That means they have to do something right

#78 Posted by daredevil21134 (12595 posts) - - Show Bio

@x35 said:

How anyone can say Alias was anything but horrible is beyond me. How can anyone describe a book that is mostly go nowhere inner-monologues fettered with swear words while an ugly (in every sense of the word) woman is having a crap as good? And that was like how they started almost every issue. And when it's not doing that it's painstakingly inserting Jones into continuity or having her having grotesque sex with things. All the while swearing.

This makes me feel better about not liking her being married to Luke Cage