Since this thread is continuing, I thought I'd add a few more. Again, we know what opinions are worth, and mine is worth even less, more than likely.
Casanova was impossible for me to digest. It, to me, was all over the place, leaving me frustrated and confused at the same time. I like deep stories, but this one was incomprehensible to me.
I really enjoyed Walking Dead for years and years, but it has lost its luster for me. Rick and co. find new settlement, zombies come and eat some folks, Rick and co. move on to find another settlement. I think the series is resting on its own laurels, and it's time to call it a day.
I've never been a fan of JR JR's art. To me, he mimics another artist for a while, then moves on to find another to mimic. But people love him.
Sandman has been mentioned a few times. I liked it as a teenager, but read it again a few years ago and couldn't recall what all the hoopla was about. I ended up selling all my hardcovers as a result.
GREAT discussions here, and I hope that we can all keep it on the work and the tone.
I have to hold up Secret Wars as an example of an over-rated comic. I was there when it came out, and yes, it sold kerjillions of copies and was almost the perfect comic for a 12 year old comic fan...but as a 20 year old reading it, I was shocked at just how clumsy it was. Shooter himself held it up as an example of what he felt comics should be, and that is probably why I dislike the books he oversees.
Characterizations for EVERYONE was ham fisted and one dimensional. Wasp = stupid and boy obsessed, Wolverine = psychotic, Dr. Doom = cackling movie serial villain, and so on. The X-Men ALL were acting out of character, which was a damn shame since Claremont had really worked hard to make them more than just stereotypes. The plot was a two issue fill-in stretched to 12 issues, and seemed to end of someone about to do something which was quickly dismissed to get on with a lot of talking. The joke we had at the time was "How did this issue of Secret Wars end? With someone pointing off panel say 'Oh My God, LOOK!'"
Mike Zeck can do amazing art, look his runs of Master of Kung Fu, Punisher or Captain America, but his work on SW was flat, all long shots and none of the great action staging he did on other comics. I've since read interviews where everyone involved talks about how far behind they were on the book, and it shows. There's nothing to the book but surface, no character growth, no complexity of plot, interchangable dialogue... It really was everything people used to complain about DC Comics back in the 60's and 70's wrapped up in a single series.
While I get the love kids had for it, I don't get the continued reverence for, what was in effect a toy tie-in aimed at the 8 - 12 year old market. It's funny to me as well that Crisis had already been announced when Secret Wars came out, and Marvel editors said that Secret Wars was MUCH better than Crisis when Crisis started.
I tried re-reading it when CGS did a Book of the Month on it, and I disliked it even more than when it came out.
Although I disagree strongly with SolyRose in that it is possible to "convince us that we are wrong." There is no such thing as being "wrong" about art. My opinion about my individual likes and dislikes will NEVER be wrong, ever. Nobody will ever "convince" me that the Mona Lisa is priceless. I think it's ugly and boring... and I will always reserve my right to judge art for myself, thanks.
I always keep myself open to the possibility that I am wrong, or I missed something.
I know, impossible to believe in today's world that you might change your mind. :))
A couple of examples:
I used to HATE R. Crumb's art. Having been brought into comics by Kirby, I found his bigfoot style to be creepy and off-putting. Then, as I read more of his influences (EC Segar, Kurtzman, etc...) I grew to first appreciate it, and now I find I really enjoy his style (although I still find some of his more offensive underground work beyond my tastes).
I also used to not care for Picasso, but after taking a class in modern art and having what he was doing explained to me, I understood it and as a result, I still doing go out of my way to praise it, I Do appreciate and understand what he was trying to do.
I didn't care for Don Heck in my youth, but now having seen his romance and horror work, I find I like it much more than many others who worked in the genre and wish he wouldn't have had to go to super-heroes, as he does not fit well in Marvel's Kirby style of the 60's.
Flip side, I used to LOVE certain artists and writers who I now see nothing but their flaws, or when they swipe their art from. One in particular I used to REALLY enjoy until it got into the early 90's and he quit stealing poses and layout from Kirby and started doing it from the hot young Image artists...I realized he had no actual style of his own, and most of the work my him I like was inked by VERY overpowering inkers who were doing a lot of art corrections and in same cases, redrawing what he's done, treating his pencils as layouts.
On the other hand, even as a kid I disliked Vince Colletta, and used to dread his inks on artists I like liked. Now, I STILL dislike his inks and feel his ruined thousands of pages of artwork...so I CAN be consistent. >:D<
Anybody remember Contest of Champions? Possibly Marvels first limited series 3 issues with the Collector and Death picking 3 person teams of superheroes and having them battle it out for their own amusement. I loved that as a kid! I'm sure it would be terrible now but I would kill to get a copy of that series back in my collection. Well, not kill so much, but maim. Definately worth some maiming.
Anybody remember Contest of Champions? Possibly Marvels first limited series 3 issues with the Collector and Death picking 3 person teams of superheroes and having them battle it out for their own amusement. I loved that as a kid! I'm sure it would be terrible now but I would kill to get a copy of that series back in my collection. Well, not kill so much, but maim. Definately worth some maiming.
Well, seeing as how they got the score wrong...
:))
That book was supposed to be a Treasury tie-in to the 1980 Moscow Olympics, and they repurposed the pages. It's a silly little book that was no better or worse than a Bill Mantlo fill in on the Avengers or whatever. I don't think I'll ever read it again, though.
Oh, and to join in the bashing, Mark Gruenwald's Captain America run is truly over-rated (and it actually qualifies as infantile). Ugh, what a mess. Gruenwald was a terrific editor, able to coax wonderful work out of his writers and artists, but was an awful writer.
That was my favorite book for such a long time, and I have so many good memories of reading Cap in elementary school and for years after. But I can't imagine too much of it holds up especially well, especially the later stuff which I was pretty sure wasn't very good even then. I'm content to let Gruenwald's run live on positively in my memories for fear of the harsh light of reality proving them wrong.
Anybody remember Contest of Champions? Possibly Marvels first limited series 3 issues with the Collector and Death picking 3 person teams of superheroes and having them battle it out for their own amusement. I loved that as a kid! I'm sure it would be terrible now but I would kill to get a copy of that series back in my collection. Well, not kill so much, but maim. Definately worth some maiming.
Marvel released a TPB of Contest and Contest II a couple of weeks ago.
Oh, and to join in the bashing, Mark Gruenwald's Captain America run is truly over-rated (and it actually qualifies as infantile). Ugh, what a mess. Gruenwald was a terrific editor, able to coax wonderful work out of his writers and artists, but was an awful writer.
How can you say that about the run that gave us Cap-Wolf? Blasphemy!
Anybody remember Contest of Champions? Possibly Marvels first limited series 3 issues with the Collector and Death picking 3 person teams of superheroes and having them battle it out for their own amusement. I loved that as a kid! I'm sure it would be terrible now but I would kill to get a copy of that series back in my collection. Well, not kill so much, but maim. Definately worth some maiming.
Marvel released a TPB of Contest and Contest II a couple of weeks ago.
Both in one volume? I may actually have to snag that.
The two big ones for me have already been listed here.
Casanova - Everyone I know loves this. I read it, and I just don't get the appeal. I get quirky. I sometimes even enjoy quirky. This was impenetrable for me. I enjoy so much of Matt Fraction's other work, but this was something that missed me entirely.
Blankets - No offense against anyone that loved this, but, man, this book, to me, is the epitome of self-indulgent, masturbatory autobiographical independent comics. It wallows in a purported depth that it never achieves. The book took me on a journey that led seemingly nowhere, and culminated in an entirely hollow sense of overcoming that tried to apply an idea of importance where none existed, a "victory" that left me cold.
for me it'd have to be Chris Claremont's X-Men run, and that can be said for alot of older comics that have nearly the same format of writing, I really don't need the situation explained to me every page or so - not entirely hating on it, no one can't say shit about the Dark Phoenix saga, that being said, reminds me of movies with narrators, I feel more comfortable with the characters acting out the situation rather than some mysterious voice above the panels.
1. Fables This had a decent idea but the execution was very flawed and misleading. You never really got what it was like for the Fables to live in the modern world as Fabletown was their own little land where they spent most of the time, and people couldn't remember or realize that it was there. However, it's biggest mistake was that everything was overpowered. Overpowered villains, heroes, magic, whatever, not to mention death wasn't permanent. It reminded me of Heroes...
2. Sandman I surprisingly loved the first trade and I liked every other trade thereafter. The major problem was that. It would rotate from a collection of short stories, which were good to a plot with Dream. And I didn't like Dream. I didn't like emo guys in high school and I don't like them now. I wish there was more Delirum though. I liked her.
3. The Walking Dead It was good for the first few trades, but then it was a prime example of what stories should have endings. It was recycle, reuse and reduce. Same thing over and over and over. It was like The Dark Tower except that Rick never had his horn at the end.
Also, is there going to be an underrated thread? I gotta few "gems" for that.
1. Fables This had a decent idea but the execution was very flawed and misleading. You never really got what it was like for the Fables to live in the modern world as Fabletown was their own little land where they spent most of the time, and people couldn't remember or realize that it was there. However, it's biggest mistake was that everything was overpowered. Overpowered villains, heroes, magic, whatever, not to mention death wasn't permanent. It reminded me of Heroes...
2. Sandman I surprisingly loved the first trade and I liked every other trade thereafter. The major problem was that. It would rotate from a collection of short stories, which were good to a plot with Dream. And I didn't like Dream. I didn't like emo guys in high school and I don't like them now. I wish there was more Delirum though. I liked her.
3. The Walking Dead It was good for the first few trades, but then it was a prime example of what stories should have endings. It was recycle, reuse and reduce. Same thing over and over and over. It was like The Dark Tower except that Rick never had his horn at the end.
Also, is there going to be an underrated thread? I gotta few "gems" for that.
The underrated thread, like all threads, starts as soon as you start it. Anybody can create a new discussion. Although, there is currently a best comic you never hear anybody talk about thread and that is similar.
Throughout the years, for me it was X-Men and that family of books.
Don't get me wrong, there are some great stories, but overall I couldn't get into the X-Men in the same way my friends did, just like they didn't care for Avengers or FF.
Throughout the years, for me it was X-Men and that family of books.
Don't get me wrong, there are some great stories, but overall I couldn't get into the X-Men in the same way my friends did, just like they didn't care for Avengers or FF.
Yeah, X-men for about a decade definately goes on the list. Although what decade is probably ip for debate. I'd say '94-'04.
Throughout the years, for me it was X-Men and that family of books.
Don't get me wrong, there are some great stories, but overall I couldn't get into the X-Men in the same way my friends did, just like they didn't care for Avengers or FF.
I found the X-Men unreadable after issue 200 (and the year or so leading up to it weren't that great either). I dropped the book and didn't come back until Morrison. Claremont's stuff has NOT aged well, and comes off as very purple prose, but for its time, it was pretty revolutionary.
Throughout the years, for me it was X-Men and that family of books.
Don't get me wrong, there are some great stories, but overall I couldn't get into the X-Men in the same way my friends did, just like they didn't care for Avengers or FF.
Yeah, X-men for about a decade definately goes on the list. Although what decade is probably ip for debate. I'd say '94-'04.
The problem is that over-rated means that the majority think it's good. I would say that X-Men from '94-04 would definitely not fit that category (with the exception of Morrison's run). Not that it doesn't have it's fans (it could be wildly inconsistent, but there were a few moments in there that I would consider myself a fan of, but I'm just an X-Men fan in general), but it's far from universally praised. The people saying Claremont's X-Men would definitely fit in better in an "over-rated" thread. I of course disagree with them, but that's the point of this thread. :)
Anybody remember Contest of Champions? Possibly Marvels first limited series 3 issues with the Collector and Death picking 3 person teams of superheroes and having them battle it out for their own amusement. I loved that as a kid! I'm sure it would be terrible now but I would kill to get a copy of that series back in my collection. Well, not kill so much, but maim. Definately worth some maiming.
Marvel released a TPB of Contest and Contest II a couple of weeks ago.
Both in one volume? I may actually have to snag that.
Opps made a mistake it does not have Contest II. It collects: CONTEST OF CHAMPIONS #1-3 WEST COAST AVENGERS ANNUAL #2 AVENGERS ANNUAL #16.
Throughout the years, for me it was X-Men and that family of books.
Don't get me wrong, there are some great stories, but overall I couldn't get into the X-Men in the same way my friends did, just like they didn't care for Avengers or FF.
Yeah, X-men for about a decade definately goes on the list. Although what decade is probably ip for debate. I'd say '94-'04.
The problem is that over-rated means that the majority think it's good. I would say that X-Men from '94-04 would definitely not fit that category (with the exception of Morrison's run). Not that it doesn't have it's fans (it could be wildly inconsistent, but there were a few moments in there that I would consider myself a fan of, but I'm just an X-Men fan in general), but it's far from universally praised. The people saying Claremont's X-Men would definitely fit in better in an "over-rated" thread. I of course disagree with them, but that's the point of this thread. :)
yeah. I don't think a title needs to be universally praised to be over-rated. Even when the x-men was garbage it still sold issues. More issues than it deserved based on quality. so, Overrated.
For me it would be James Robinson's Starman. I'm not saying the book is bad mind you; however I just don't see why so many describe this story as being so emotionally wrenching and a must read. For the record, I have the first three omnibus editions.
Throughout the years, for me it was X-Men and that family of books.
Don't get me wrong, there are some great stories, but overall I couldn't get into the X-Men in the same way my friends did, just like they didn't care for Avengers or FF.
Yeah, X-men for about a decade definately goes on the list. Although what decade is probably ip for debate. I'd say '94-'04.
The problem is that over-rated means that the majority think it's good. I would say that X-Men from '94-04 would definitely not fit that category (with the exception of Morrison's run). Not that it doesn't have it's fans (it could be wildly inconsistent, but there were a few moments in there that I would consider myself a fan of, but I'm just an X-Men fan in general), but it's far from universally praised. The people saying Claremont's X-Men would definitely fit in better in an "over-rated" thread. I of course disagree with them, but that's the point of this thread. :)
yeah. I don't think a title needs to be universally praised to be over-rated. Even when the x-men was garbage it still sold issues. More issues than it deserved based on quality. so, Overrated.
It sounds to me like it was overbought, not overrated. I don't remember much praise of the x-men comics during that period. The cartoon was selling the books, not people raving about it.
There really isn't anything I consider over-rated becaue I just class them as things I just fon't get. I haven't developed an understanding or a like to, not neccessarily that they are bad or good.
I just didn't get into Sandman but I understand how it is good
Throughout the years, for me it was X-Men and that family of books.
Don't get me wrong, there are some great stories, but overall I couldn't get into the X-Men in the same way my friends did, just like they didn't care for Avengers or FF.
Yeah, X-men for about a decade definately goes on the list. Although what decade is probably ip for debate. I'd say '94-'04.
The problem is that over-rated means that the majority think it's good. I would say that X-Men from '94-04 would definitely not fit that category (with the exception of Morrison's run). Not that it doesn't have it's fans (it could be wildly inconsistent, but there were a few moments in there that I would consider myself a fan of, but I'm just an X-Men fan in general), but it's far from universally praised. The people saying Claremont's X-Men would definitely fit in better in an "over-rated" thread. I of course disagree with them, but that's the point of this thread. :)
yeah. I don't think a title needs to be universally praised to be over-rated. Even when the x-men was garbage it still sold issues. More issues than it deserved based on quality. so, Overrated.
It sounds to me like it was overbought, not overrated. I don't remember much praise of the x-men comics during that period. The cartoon was selling the books, not people raving about it.
So you agree with me the x-men in that era was terrible..
And you agree with me that it sold better than it was.
Throughout the years, for me it was X-Men and that family of books.
Don't get me wrong, there are some great stories, but overall I couldn't get into the X-Men in the same way my friends did, just like they didn't care for Avengers or FF.
Yeah, X-men for about a decade definately goes on the list. Although what decade is probably ip for debate. I'd say '94-'04.
The problem is that over-rated means that the majority think it's good. I would say that X-Men from '94-04 would definitely not fit that category (with the exception of Morrison's run). Not that it doesn't have it's fans (it could be wildly inconsistent, but there were a few moments in there that I would consider myself a fan of, but I'm just an X-Men fan in general), but it's far from universally praised. The people saying Claremont's X-Men would definitely fit in better in an "over-rated" thread. I of course disagree with them, but that's the point of this thread. :)
yeah. I don't think a title needs to be universally praised to be over-rated. Even when the x-men was garbage it still sold issues. More issues than it deserved based on quality. so, Overrated.
It sounds to me like it was overbought, not overrated. I don't remember much praise of the x-men comics during that period. The cartoon was selling the books, not people raving about it.
So you agree with me the x-men in that era was terrible..
And you agree with me that it sold better than it was.
You disagree with the word over-rated.
*shrugs*
Okay.
Exactly!
Here's a comparison. If this were a thread on over-rated movies, would you think Batman and Robin belonged on that list? Of course not, nobody has anything good to say about it. Would the first Austin Powers movie belong on that list? If you didn't like it, yeah. Batman and Robin made double the box office that Austin Powers did.
I think Mike summed it up very well by saying it was oversold rather than over-rated.
Nobody is arguing that Twilight was a critical success.
The X-men were over-rated for about ten years. The hype was huge. I know this because any time some kid tells me Gambit or Cable is their favorite character I want to eat a bullet.
Comments
Casanova was impossible for me to digest. It, to me, was all over the place, leaving me frustrated and confused at the same time. I like deep stories, but this one was incomprehensible to me.
I really enjoyed Walking Dead for years and years, but it has lost its luster for me. Rick and co. find new settlement, zombies come and eat some folks, Rick and co. move on to find another settlement. I think the series is resting on its own laurels, and it's time to call it a day.
I've never been a fan of JR JR's art. To me, he mimics another artist for a while, then moves on to find another to mimic. But people love him.
Sandman has been mentioned a few times. I liked it as a teenager, but read it again a few years ago and couldn't recall what all the hoopla was about. I ended up selling all my hardcovers as a result.
I have to hold up Secret Wars as an example of an over-rated comic. I was there when it came out, and yes, it sold kerjillions of copies and was almost the perfect comic for a 12 year old comic fan...but as a 20 year old reading it, I was shocked at just how clumsy it was. Shooter himself held it up as an example of what he felt comics should be, and that is probably why I dislike the books he oversees.
Characterizations for EVERYONE was ham fisted and one dimensional. Wasp = stupid and boy obsessed, Wolverine = psychotic, Dr. Doom = cackling movie serial villain, and so on. The X-Men ALL were acting out of character, which was a damn shame since Claremont had really worked hard to make them more than just stereotypes. The plot was a two issue fill-in stretched to 12 issues, and seemed to end of someone about to do something which was quickly dismissed to get on with a lot of talking. The joke we had at the time was "How did this issue of Secret Wars end? With someone pointing off panel say 'Oh My God, LOOK!'"
Mike Zeck can do amazing art, look his runs of Master of Kung Fu, Punisher or Captain America, but his work on SW was flat, all long shots and none of the great action staging he did on other comics. I've since read interviews where everyone involved talks about how far behind they were on the book, and it shows. There's nothing to the book but surface, no character growth, no complexity of plot, interchangable dialogue... It really was everything people used to complain about DC Comics back in the 60's and 70's wrapped up in a single series.
While I get the love kids had for it, I don't get the continued reverence for, what was in effect a toy tie-in aimed at the 8 - 12 year old market. It's funny to me as well that Crisis had already been announced when Secret Wars came out, and Marvel editors said that Secret Wars was MUCH better than Crisis when Crisis started.
I tried re-reading it when CGS did a Book of the Month on it, and I disliked it even more than when it came out.
I know, impossible to believe in today's world that you might change your mind. :))
A couple of examples:
I used to HATE R. Crumb's art. Having been brought into comics by Kirby, I found his bigfoot style to be creepy and off-putting. Then, as I read more of his influences (EC Segar, Kurtzman, etc...) I grew to first appreciate it, and now I find I really enjoy his style (although I still find some of his more offensive underground work beyond my tastes).
I also used to not care for Picasso, but after taking a class in modern art and having what he was doing explained to me, I understood it and as a result, I still doing go out of my way to praise it, I Do appreciate and understand what he was trying to do.
I didn't care for Don Heck in my youth, but now having seen his romance and horror work, I find I like it much more than many others who worked in the genre and wish he wouldn't have had to go to super-heroes, as he does not fit well in Marvel's Kirby style of the 60's.
Flip side, I used to LOVE certain artists and writers who I now see nothing but their flaws, or when they swipe their art from. One in particular I used to REALLY enjoy until it got into the early 90's and he quit stealing poses and layout from Kirby and started doing it from the hot young Image artists...I realized he had no actual style of his own, and most of the work my him I like was inked by VERY overpowering inkers who were doing a lot of art corrections and in same cases, redrawing what he's done, treating his pencils as layouts.
On the other hand, even as a kid I disliked Vince Colletta, and used to dread his inks on artists I like liked. Now, I STILL dislike his inks and feel his ruined thousands of pages of artwork...so I CAN be consistent. >:D<
:))
That book was supposed to be a Treasury tie-in to the 1980 Moscow Olympics, and they repurposed the pages. It's a silly little book that was no better or worse than a Bill Mantlo fill in on the Avengers or whatever. I don't think I'll ever read it again, though.
"Z" my @$$, it was more like a "Z-minus".
Casanova - Everyone I know loves this. I read it, and I just don't get the appeal. I get quirky. I sometimes even enjoy quirky. This was impenetrable for me. I enjoy so much of Matt Fraction's other work, but this was something that missed me entirely.
Blankets - No offense against anyone that loved this, but, man, this book, to me, is the epitome of self-indulgent, masturbatory autobiographical independent comics. It wallows in a purported depth that it never achieves. The book took me on a journey that led seemingly nowhere, and culminated in an entirely hollow sense of overcoming that tried to apply an idea of importance where none existed, a "victory" that left me cold.
1. Fables
This had a decent idea but the execution was very flawed and misleading. You never really got what it was like for the Fables to live in the modern world as Fabletown was their own little land where they spent most of the time, and people couldn't remember or realize that it was there. However, it's biggest mistake was that everything was overpowered. Overpowered villains, heroes, magic, whatever, not to mention death wasn't permanent. It reminded me of Heroes...
2. Sandman
I surprisingly loved the first trade and I liked every other trade thereafter. The major problem was that. It would rotate from a collection of short stories, which were good to a plot with Dream. And I didn't like Dream. I didn't like emo guys in high school and I don't like them now. I wish there was more Delirum though. I liked her.
3. The Walking Dead
It was good for the first few trades, but then it was a prime example of what stories should have endings. It was recycle, reuse and reduce. Same thing over and over and over. It was like The Dark Tower except that Rick never had his horn at the end.
Also, is there going to be an underrated thread? I gotta few "gems" for that.
Don't get me wrong, there are some great stories, but overall I couldn't get into the X-Men in the same way my friends did, just like they didn't care for Avengers or FF.
CONTEST OF CHAMPIONS #1-3
WEST COAST AVENGERS ANNUAL #2
AVENGERS ANNUAL #16.
I just didn't get into Sandman but I understand how it is good
And you agree with me that it sold better than it was.
You disagree with the word over-rated.
*shrugs*
Okay.
Here's a comparison. If this were a thread on over-rated movies, would you think Batman and Robin belonged on that list? Of course not, nobody has anything good to say about it. Would the first Austin Powers movie belong on that list? If you didn't like it, yeah. Batman and Robin made double the box office that Austin Powers did.
I think Mike summed it up very well by saying it was oversold rather than over-rated.
i.e. Twilight is over-rated.
Nobody is arguing that Twilight was a critical success.
The X-men were over-rated for about ten years. The hype was huge. I know this because any time some kid tells me Gambit or Cable is their favorite character I want to eat a bullet.
Gambit/Cable > or = Edward/Jacob.
(good god somebody is going to have a stroke)