|
Post by pacino on Apr 10, 2014 8:28:27 GMT -5
Bob, I'm unclear if this was asked of you already but I'm not able to check through the previous 18 pages, so here goes. I've been reading some Silver Age Marvel and have noticed the completely different style in the way comics were written. It was much more of a 'tell me everything every panel' instead of a 'show me' decompressed-style that is around today. What is your favorite style of comic book writing?? Do you have a favorite age, be it golden, silver, bronze, 'heroic'?
|
|
|
Post by Bob Reyer on Apr 10, 2014 9:44:10 GMT -5
Bob, I'm unclear if this was asked of you already but I'm not able to check through the previous 18 pages, so here goes. I've been reading some Silver Age Marvel and have noticed the completely different style in the way comics were written. It was much more of a 'tell me everything every panel' instead of a 'show me' decompressed-style that is around today. What is your favorite style of comic book writing?? Do you have a favorite age, be it golden, silver, bronze, 'heroic'? Chris, Not a problem even if I have answered it! I grew up during the Silver Age when over at DC, captions for panels tended to just tell you what you were looking at, reading "Meanwhile...", "Suddenly...", or "As Superman flew through space...", but then Stan Lee changed the way comics were written, and who they were written for, so my answer as to "favorite age" would be Silver Age Marvel, for the sheer inventiveness of Messers Lee, Kirby, Ditko, Heck, Romita and the rest. As to writing style, it would probably be the same, although that style completely informed how the Bronze Age at both companies would be handled, and there are a ton of writers from that era that I love nearly as well, such as Roy Thomas, Steve Englehart, Steve Gerber, Chris Claremont, John Byrne, Marv Wolfman, Jim Starlin, and many, many more. Those creators added to what Stan and his co-creators did, bringing a heightened realism to the "real world" of heroes that Marvel had begun, but they never forgot that comics should be fun, and as Stan often said, his characters were "heroes with flaws, not flawed heroes"! I posted this elsewhere recently, but It's always fun to see; here's my favorite page of comics ever from Captain America #113. The astounding artwork is by Jim Steranko, and the stirring caption by Stan Lee: 'Nuff said!
|
|
|
Post by CaptainSuperior on Apr 10, 2014 20:03:36 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by CaptainSuperior on Apr 18, 2014 10:44:29 GMT -5
Bob if you liked the issue #1 of Nightcrawler you should really like this weeks Amazing X-men #6.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Reyer on Apr 18, 2014 11:11:52 GMT -5
Bob if you liked the issue #1 of Nightcrawler you should really like this weeks Amazing X-men #6. Cap'n, I'm very much out of the "X" loop, so I'll take a look, but I won't promise anything beyond that!!
|
|
|
Post by CaptainSuperior on Apr 18, 2014 12:02:41 GMT -5
Bob if you liked the issue #1 of Nightcrawler you should really like this weeks Amazing X-men #6. Cap'n, I'm very much out of the "X" loop, so I'll take a look, but I won't promise anything beyond that!! It's very much a one shot kind of issue, it has all the X-men coming together celebrating Kurt's return.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Reyer on Apr 18, 2014 12:49:54 GMT -5
Cap'n, I'm very much out of the "X" loop, so I'll take a look, but I won't promise anything beyond that!! It's very much a one shot kind of issue, it has all the X-men coming together celebrating Kurt's return. Well, Cap'n, on that celebratory basis it might be worth checking out!
|
|
|
Post by CaptainSuperior on Apr 22, 2014 12:41:00 GMT -5
Hey Bob, if your into classic monster stuff you should check out Frankenstein Alive, Alive. IDW is putting it out, written by Steve Niles and art by Bernie Wrightson. The story is about what happens to the Monster after the Frankenstein novel. The pencil work is absolutely astounding, however the series has had major delays. Right now you can only get issues #1-3. Here is a sample:
|
|
|
Post by Bob Reyer on Apr 22, 2014 16:27:24 GMT -5
Cap'n,
I almost had this one in my "Covers of the Week", but I ran out of room!
It looks stunning (of course--it's Wrightson!), and from your description, it sounds like a fascinating story, too!
Maybe I'll ask Santa for the collection if it's out in time for Christmas!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2014 17:39:33 GMT -5
After a week away I just got to listening to last weeks podcast and was happy to hear your thoughts on Nightcrawler. I am also WAY out of the X loop for all the usual too-many-titles/events/crossovers reasons. But I picked this up because my order that week was light. And I loved it. The only Claremont X-Men I've read are Days of Future Past, God Loves, Man Kills and the Phoenix Saga. But I loved them so much and this issue took me right back to that moment when they're in the Danger room in God Loves Man Kills.
I've found it so difficult to get into any X books for so long, the only runs I can happily re-read are the above mentioned and Millar's Ultimate X-Men. But this book has me hooked and I can't wait for the next one.
|
|
|
Post by pacino on Apr 24, 2014 8:27:14 GMT -5
Hey Bob, what were your thoughts on Civil War?
|
|
|
Post by Bob Reyer on Apr 24, 2014 10:29:18 GMT -5
Hey Bob, what were your thoughts on Civil War? Chris, I'm not a fan, frankly, and for most of the reasons you'd imagine, and some you may not. Coming as it did on the heels of "Avengers Disassembled" and "House of M", "Civil War" seemed the culmination of years of heroes fighting heroes, and a rather dire era of comics history that I could have done without. It was more-than-likely the start of my "event burn-out" as well, with tie-ins, one-shots, galleries, and sidebar issues galore to the point of absurdity. On the story-telling front, one point at the very beginning set such a false note that it I couldn't ever get past it; Mark Millar and crew had Reed Richards advocating for super-hero registration, when back in 1989's Fantastic Four #335--#336, Walt Simonson had Sue and Reed speaking quite elequently before Congress against a similar legislation! In #335, Sue responded thusly to a question: SUE: Yes, sir, we do have a son, Franklin, and speaking as his mother, I'm worried about any law that's going to create yet another file on him in some nameless computer in Washington. I want my son to grow up knowing what freedom in the United States is supposed to mean, not what it would have meant if he wasn't "special".
In #336, this from Mr. Fantastic: REED: We live in a world where so-called super-villains are an everyday fact of life. So are beings of great power and even some of cosmic significance, and in this world, super-heroes do a job that nobody else can do. They're not paid, they suffer injuries, and they're not insured. Most do it out of that sense of altruism Mr. Gyrich referred to earlier, and out of a sense of holding society together against the forces of chaos that their foes represent. The very nature of these activities often puts them beyond the experience of non-super-humans, and makes it difficult for a non-super-human to exercise a considered judgment regarding their activities....Does the Congressman propose that he be the one to oversee the Fantastic Four and tell them what to do and when to do it?
Later in that issue: SUE: I'd like to add a few words to what my husband has already said regarding the proposed law. The gun lobby spokesman who testified earlier cited the citizen's right to bear arms and equated that right with the right of super-powered men and women to bear their powers. Bearing arms is a constitutional right, but some people choose to interpret that right in its broadest sense, thereby including weapons like assault rifles, weapons designed for only one purpose, and it certainly isn't deer hunting. All this at a time when an invasion from hostile forces or nations seems remote. But the invasion by super-powered individuals and teams continues as we speak...literally. The existence and activities of such people determined to break the law are an on-going menace to the forces of order everywhere. We're not talking about a theoretical or hypothetical threat, we're talking about the real thing, here-and-now. REED: Such individuals simply are not a problem that non-super-humans have handled effectively for the most part. An entire regular Army division designed specifically for the purpose was never able to contain the Hulk. Mr. Gyrich mentioned his work with the Avengers. The record clearly shows that with the best of intentions, Mr. Gyrich did a fine job of hamstringing them, nearly destroying them in the process, and yet over the years, the Avengers had had an impressive record of successes defending this planet against an incredible array of foes. Were they really in need of Mr. Gyrich's supervision? Our worry is that however well-meaning the creation of some sort of regulating body of law, it will ultimately hamstring super-heroes to the point where they can no longer deal adequately with the problems of super-villains.
At this point, some super-villainy breaks out that the FF deal with, and after an extra plot twist, the legislation is tabled. So, teacher, you can see why Reed's stance during "Civil War" would have fried my brain!
|
|
|
Post by pacino on Apr 24, 2014 11:45:24 GMT -5
I love your responses. What a pull quote! Sheesh, I guess Millar didn't read that, or chose to ignore it.
I hated Civil War because who I thought were the 'bad guys' in the event ended up basically winning, and then Captain America had to slink off into the sunset. It just seemed horrible that Cap was the guy who was arrested when the US was quite literally cataloguing its own citizens without them creating any offense. It was just an analogue for what we did in WWII to the Japanese, and it won out! I guess it was supposed to be a critique of what we were doing at the time, but it fell flat to me because it really affected the Marvel Universe in what I thought was a negative way.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Reyer on Apr 24, 2014 14:10:41 GMT -5
I love your responses. What a pull quote! Sheesh, I guess Millar didn't read that, or chose to ignore it. I hated Civil War because who I thought were the 'bad guys' in the event ended up basically winning, and then Captain America had to slink off into the sunset. It just seemed horrible that Cap was the guy who was arrested when the US was quite literally cataloguing its own citizens without them creating any offense. It was just an analogue for what we did in WWII to the Japanese, and it won out! I guess it was supposed to be a critique of what we were doing at the time, but it fell flat to me because it really affected the Marvel Universe in what I thought was a negative way. Chris, You are so right about Cap! His position should have been the one celebrated by being victorious, not by having him surrender both physically and philosophically, and then get murdered in front of our eyes! We've talked about this on-air now-and-again, but would it be such a bad thing if instead of these giant "universe-altering events", we had a "super-villains rob banks month" in their place, just for variety of tone?
|
|
|
Post by wjohnson22 on Apr 24, 2014 14:21:49 GMT -5
Hi, Bob! Really enjoyed this week's podcast. I have a 2-year-old daughter and we are expecting another girl in August, so I really appreciated you spearheading the discussion this week on female depictions and bullying.
Until recently, I hadn't been reading many Marvel books, but I have really been enjoying many of the new female-led books, specifically Captain Marvel, Ms. Marvel, She-Hulk, and Black Widow. Is this the first time you can remember having so many female-led books come out around the same time, or have there been similar attempts before?
|
|