Missy Posted December 28, 2005 Report Share Posted December 28, 2005 Here's his bio. The last paragraph sums up my feelings for the man: The most common criticism of his work is his overly descriptive writing style. Claremont's characters tend to speak in long paragraphs that are often called forced or unrealistic. He frequently employs omniscient narration to describe events that can easily be conveyed in the art and uneeded (sic) thought bubbles to spell out character motivation and personality, especially during action scenes. He's an astute writer with a keen understanding of the characters, but he tends to overwrite everything and his books can be rather inaccessible to new readers. Personally, I'd rate him a six. However, because he penned so many classic tales, created so many memorable characters and wrote X-Men #1 (the top-selling comic book of all-time), I'll gladly bump him up a notch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tglancy Posted December 29, 2005 Report Share Posted December 29, 2005 Good Idea. However, I can't stand Claremont. Don't get me wrong, his classic stuff is just that: classic. But, his recent work, and really anything after he left Marvel in 91, is just awful. His return to the X-Men has been nothing short of terrible, especially when compared to the great writers around today who can write dialouge and tell a story in half the words that he can. His style is pure 80's. His work in the day is a solid 8, but his new stuff is shite as far as I am concerned, a 2. I'll give him a 6, because he is better than average and the good does outweigh the bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drqshadow Posted December 30, 2005 Report Share Posted December 30, 2005 Personally, I'd rate him a six. However, because he penned so many classic tales, created so many memorable characters and wrote X-Men #1 (the top-selling comic book of all-time), I'll gladly bump him up a notch. That sums it up for me, as well. He actually wasn't as wordy with his writing in the 80s, which was his prime, and seemed to try to make up for his fading abilities and ideas as a writer by filling the page with paragraph upon paragraph of wordsmithing. His work with John Byrne on the X-Men of the mid 80s is legendary freaking stuff and still a great read today, but he was definitely losing steam before he left Marvel in the 90s. Read X-Men #1, which he wrote with Jim Lee, for an example of some of the most needlessly lengthy dialogue ever. Ever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James D. Posted December 30, 2005 Report Share Posted December 30, 2005 Read X-Men #1, which he wrote with Jim Lee, for an example of some of the most needlessly lengthy dialogue ever. Ever. Good God, QFT. That book is just insane when it comes to incessant rambling. I'll vote him a 6 as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darque Edge Posted February 21, 2006 Report Share Posted February 21, 2006 I'm voting a two. I know he did some great, great stuff in the past, but he's actually damaged X-Men (almost irreperably) this millenium. His god-awful run in 2000 could not have come with worse timing. A shit-load of potential new fans, due to the X-Men movie finally coming out, and what do we get? Verbal Diorrheah, horrible new costumes, stupid plots, incomprehensible storylines, and some crap about a boat. Yeah. Stupid. Not to mention his irritating habit of tying up loose ends from fifteen years ago (plus), purely so that he can. Or re-introducing characters for no godly reason, and with no care to explain them to new readers. For example, the recent reintroduction of Rachel Summers. Why, exactly? For no reason. And how was her absence explained? It wasn't. Everyone just acted like she'd been in the kitchen making a sandwich. For five pages of dialogue. Ugh. Oh, and whether it's true or not, I love, love, love the rumour I've heard from a couple of different sources (I suspect it's highly false, but I don't care, cause it's funny), that Mr. Claremont has a hobby of getting artists do draw him pictures of him in compromising positions with some of the younger characters he writes about. Big fan of Kitty Pride and Jubilee, from what I was told. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Missy Posted February 21, 2006 Author Report Share Posted February 21, 2006 Oh, and whether it's true or not, I love, love, love the rumour I've heard from a couple of different sources (I suspect it's highly false, but I don't care, cause it's funny), that Mr. Claremont has a hobby of getting artists do draw him pictures of him in compromising positions with some of the younger characters he writes about. Big fan of Kitty Pride and Jubilee, from what I was told. At Wizard World Philly (or maybe Chicago) he was asked, "Are the rumors about the Jubilee drawings true?" All the other creators on the dais stifled their laughter, and then Chris muttered, "She's the wrong gender." Due to how softly he said it, I honestly don't think his response was heard by the majority of the room. In fact, I only heard him because Jen and I were sitting in the front row. Is he gay, or was that a joke? (I assume it was a joke uttered to dodge the question, because I could swear he's married.) 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.