Koete Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 Marvel is better than DC. DC can have writers that make characters hard to do again because a series might fail. Yes. Because only DC can have series that fail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grahamvidger Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 Marvel is better than DC. DC can have writers that make characters hard to do again because a series might fail. Yes. Because only DC can have series that fail. Sarcasm? It happens more with DC. And when it does happen with DC its because thee series is always actually bad. And it may just be a lot of the stuff I read from them, but it seems like they mostly have the writers that make the characters be hard to do again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Missy Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 What are you basing that on? For every recently failed DC book you name, someone can easily name a doomed Marvel comic. Furthermore, Marvel tends to quickly cancel low-selling books, whereas DC sticks with a comic for a while. Manhunter, Blue Beetle, and The All New Atom lasted a lot longer than they would have at Marvel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koete Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 Jonah Hex as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Missy Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 Exactly. One look at the September 2009 sales charts will show you the following: Marvel canceled Exiles at the sixth issue, despite the fact that it sold 19,000 issues. However, DC continues to publish books that are selling much worse than that: Jonah Hex #47 sold 12,200, REBELS #8 sold 11,300, and Vigilante #10 sold 7800. (Okay, Vigilante is ending at the 12th issue, but that's still six more issues than a better-selling comic (RE: Exiles) received. And calling something "bad," that's normally a matter of taste. I didn't like the recent Blue Beetle series, but it wasn't bad. It simply wasn't my cup of tea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dread Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 The fundamental point here is that you've failed to realize that Dubs likes things that are not good. I could look at that list and tell you why Morrison is better than all of those writers (especially Kirkman, who's only written one thing of note) but then that would be my opinion. Like everything else. As much as you can hate the idea of someone being elitist about Morrison, I can hate the idea that people think he sucks because they can't understand what he's writing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grahamvidger Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 What are you basing that on? For every recently failed DC book you name, someone can easily name a doomed Marvel comic. Furthermore, Marvel tends to quickly cancel low-selling books, whereas DC sticks with a comic for a while. Manhunter, Blue Beetle, and The All New Atom lasted a lot longer than they would have at Marvel. Marvel kills things quicker because they have better things they can be doing. DC just sticks with the stuff longer because they kind of suck. DC always sucks at bringing back characters or creating new ones in the last decade or so. Even if they do do it right, there will always be the crappy current Batman or Superman story. I'd say that generally Marvel keeps their most popular characters with good stories. And if they get some bad new series, they kill them off sooner and don't reuse them anytime soon, when DC would not kill them off that soon and they would reuse them not that much farther into the future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grahamvidger Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 The fundamental point here is that you've failed to realize that Dubs likes things that are not good. Well it is hard to like one writer so much now, I mean the super hero comics industry can make a lot of shit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dread Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 do do Agreed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koete Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 Marvel kills things quicker because they have better things they can be doing. Better than more issues of Irredeemable Ant-Man? Not likely. DC just sticks with the stuff longer because they kind of suck. That statement makes so much sense, I'm at a loss for words. DC always sucks at bringing back characters or creating new ones in the last decade or so. Even if they do do it right, there will always be the crappy current Batman or Superman story. Yes, and Marvel never publishes crappy current Wolverine stories. And as far as sucking at bringing back characters? Hal Jordan pretty much disproves that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grahamvidger Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 DC always sucks at bringing back characters or creating new ones in the last decade or so. Even if they do do it right, there will always be the crappy current Batman or Superman story. Yes, and Marvel never publishes crappy current Wolverine stories. That's because everyone wants to fuck Wolverine. Do the recent Spider-Man comics work well? I have only been buying Spider trades so I can't quite say if he's that great right now, but I think he still is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Missy Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 Graham, all of us want to have great debates, that's why these forums are here. However, that can't happen when one side is making points based on facts, and the other is tossing around wild, unsupported statements. Either back your points up with numbers and facts, or stop. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 As much as you can hate the idea of someone being elitist about Morrison, I can hate the idea that people think he sucks because they can't understand what he's writing. That's the thing. If someone doesn't like a work of his, it's assumed they just didn't "understand" it. I understood We3. I understood All-Star Superman. I just didn't like them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sn4tcH Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 As much as you can hate the idea of someone being elitist about Morrison, I can hate the idea that people think he sucks because they can't understand what he's writing. That's the thing. If someone doesn't like a work of his, it's assumed they just didn't "understand" it. I understood We3. I understood All-Star Superman. I just didn't like them. I don't see how anyone couldn't "get" All-Star Superman and We3, those are extremely linear for Morrison. I love them both by the way, so it's simply a matter of taste, and you can't argue taste other than straight out saying someone's taste is "bad". Besides that though, I did have to re-read Batman R.I.P. a few times to "get" it, along with the rest of Morrisons Batman run, since there were clues throughout. I thought I "got" it, but I didn't. I'm still not sure that I do, because a good story can be argued about, and especially the authors intentions for the story. The reason I use Batman RIP for the example is because I think it, and Final Crisis, are the ones most Morrison fans point to when they talk about people not "getting" it. I don't mean to sound elitist, but I truly believe most people "think" they understand what happened in those stories, but they really don't. Even I admit to not totally getting Final Crisis, but upon 3rd and 4th readings, it makes more sense, and I'm grasping his story telling technique better than I did the first time I read it for sure. And that's the thing, once I understand how he's telling the story, it's easier to understand the story being told. And I'm not saying Final Crisis is genius storytelling, but I don't like to be spoon fed either, and if an author makes me work a bit more for a story, I can respect that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dread Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 I don't understand why it is negative that DC supports lower tier books for the long haul. They're often the best ones. Simon Dark at least got 18 issues. But with Cap Britain and MI-13 and Agents of Atlas going away, Marvel has cancelled the best new titles they have had in ages before they were allowed to reach maturity. I'm not sure I want to support AoA when it comes back simply for the fact that I don't trust Marvel anymore.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 As much as you can hate the idea of someone being elitist about Morrison, I can hate the idea that people think he sucks because they can't understand what he's writing. That's the thing. If someone doesn't like a work of his, it's assumed they just didn't "understand" it. I understood We3. I understood All-Star Superman. I just didn't like them. I don't see how you couldn't "get" All-Star Superman and We3, those are extremely linear for Morrison. I love them both by the way, so it's simply a matter of taste, and you can't argue taste other than straight out saying someone's taste is "bad". Besides that though, I did have to re-read Batman R.I.P. a few times to "get" it, along with the rest of Morrisons Batman run, since there were clues throughout. I thought I "got" it, but I didn't. I'm still not sure that I do, because a good story can be argued about, and especially the authors intentions for the story. The reason I use Batman RIP for the example is because I think it, and Final Crisis, are the ones most Morrison fans point to when they talk about people not "getting" it. I don't mean to sound elitist, but I truly believe most people "think" they understand what happened in those stories, but they really don't. Even I admit to not totally getting Final Crisis, but upon 3rd and 4th readings, it makes more sense, and I'm grasping his story telling technique better than I did the first time I read it for sure. And that's the thing, once I understand how he's telling the story, it's easier to understand the story being told. And I'm not saying Final Crisis is genius storytelling, but I don't like to be spoon fed either, and if an author makes me work a bit more for a story, I can respect that. I'm generally opposed to a narrative standing almost completely alone on the strength of subtext, like RIP was. Not to say that I don't appreciate that kind of thing, but a story should be able to stand on it's own, with or without that. RIP was written in such a disjointed manner that there was no way to enjoy it without reading dozens of stories that came before it, and I'm sorry, but if you're charging someone $30 for a comic, you shouldn't have to spend more on additional stories just to get any coherent enjoyment out of it. There are ways to make all of the wacky references that he likes and still tell a good story. He just didn't care to in that case. I "get" Batman RIP. He's referencing and celebrating the history of one of comic's most popular and long-running characters. I just don't think he did it very well. And I understood Final Crisis just fine. It's one of the few Morrison works that I'm sort of ambivalent on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sn4tcH Posted October 26, 2009 Report Share Posted October 26, 2009 I "get" Batman RIP. He's referencing and celebrating the history of one of comic's most popular and long-running characters. I just don't think he did it very well. That's what Morrisons whole run is about. People tend to not understand RIP itself. RIP is better if you had read the earlier issues, but they're not essential. Like Empire Strikes Back is good on it's own, but it's probably better if you've seen Star Wars. I think there's a lot about it people aren't willing to accept as well, the big one being that Dr. Hurt is the biblical Devil. I'm not really sure by what you mean by "disjointed", I think RIP is pretty linear as well, especially in comparison to Final Crisis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dread Posted October 26, 2009 Report Share Posted October 26, 2009 I thought RIP was pretty straight forward. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 26, 2009 Report Share Posted October 26, 2009 I don't even like Star Wars but comparing RIP to the Empire Strikes Back is insulting to anyone that's ever enjoyed that movie. It doesn't stand alone on its own. Ask any average comic fan who The Batman of Zur-En-Arrh is. People can talk about how Morrison is being daring because he doesn't hold hands or whatever, but when you advertise in the title of the book that you're going to be killing Batman, it's your job as a writer of a mainstream comic book to consider the fact that there may actually be some people buying that hardcover that didn't read the last 75 issues of Batman. Anyways, I'm done. I'm arguing with three and a half people and it's not like anyone is going to change their mind here. I'm fully aware that I'm in the minority on the guy and outside of reviews, I'm done reading him anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dread Posted October 26, 2009 Report Share Posted October 26, 2009 Thanks for considering me half a person. I'm just saying you don't need to know who Batman of Zur-En-Arhh to understand that he went Bat-shit crazy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.