Why aren’t praised creators of the 80s and 90s on big books for the big two?

[MajorHoy]

Tastes change and what was loved now will be out of step in the future.

But is that because former fans are no longer interested or partly because the audience has changed and readers who weren't around for those earlier runs just aren't that interested in that style?

[KurtW95]

The biggest thing with older writers or artist is the tastes of the consumer change. I remember when Ditko came back to marvel in the 80's and his work stuck out like a sore thumb with everything else Marvel was putting out. His work on books like Speedball and then his art on Rom was just so out of step with what other artists were doing a tthe time. That happens to pretty much every artist and writer at some point. Guys like Claremont and Byrne were great to us back in the day, but new readers find them stiff and too wordy. It is the same way that in 10 or 20 years guys like Arron and Hickman will be seen by new readers the way Byrne and Claremont are today.

It is just the circle of life. Tastes change and what was loved now will be out of step in the future.

Again, I very much disagree with the whole “tastes change“ thing. There are loads of people right now who want to buy comics, but will not buy any of the new crap being peddled. And people can portray them as a “dying audience” of middle aged fans that can afford to be lost, but the fact is there are significantly more young fans who like the older stuff and would buy new books with that kind of quality than the much smaller group that will but crappy books by lousy writers. I’m sick of the excuses from people pretending that quality has little to no causation with how bad sales are today. There have always been competing interests and there’s no reason the ones of today should draw away exponentially more customers than ten years ago.

[Trey Strain]

I don't think "changing tastes" makes people who wrote comics 25 years ago unable to write them now. I think it's having no more stories to tell.

[DungeonmasterJim]

I don't think "changing tastes" makes people who wrote comics 25 years ago unable to write them now. I think it's having no more stories to tell.

I think changing tastes has something to do with it but not all. I LOVED 80's Claremont X-Men but I was also a teen when I read them. Now I read a Claremont written comic and most of the time it's an effort just to finish the comic. I'm not the same person I was back in the 80's and early 90's so something came along to make Claremont rather irrelevant to me these days. That's sad to me because Claremont was like a god to me back in the day.

[KurtW95]

I don't think "changing tastes" makes people who wrote comics 25 years ago unable to write them now. I think it's having no more stories to tell.

I think that may be true for some, but definitely not all. And it’s crime to let those who do have more stories to tell sit idly by when garbage is being peddled.

[ed2962]

I'd also add that for some of these creators, comics need them more than they need comics. Some probably would come back but only under the right conditions. Priest was offered a number of characters but he didn't like what he was being offered ( he felt he was being typecast). Joe Mad has said before that he told Joe Q that Video games was his priority now and he'd only do comics if he could find spare time. I'm not sure how they got Gerry Conway to come back but he's had a career in TV/Movies for decades...he certainly wasn't pining for a chance to write whatever Avengers spin-off. Steve Englehart has said flat out that he won't come back to comics ( he feels he got screwed concerning the Batman movies).

[dancj]

Again, I very much disagree with the whole “tastes change“ thing. There are loads of people right now who want to buy comics, but will not buy any of the new crap being peddled.

You really think current comics are crap?

Obviously there is some crap now - as there always has been - but really, the standard is much higher now. Brian K Vaughan, Tom King, Joe Hill, Ed Brubaker, Greg Rucka, Robert Kirkman, Grant Morrison, Garth Ennis, Rob Williams, Dave Lapham, Warren Ellis, Jeff Lemire etc. There's some great stuff out there, and it's way better than the vast majority of what was produced in the past.

If it's not to your tastes, that's fair enough, but that doesn't make it crap.

[Bryan]

I had favorite artists from the 70's and 80's that I followed religiously, some I still do. The ones I do not follow today are the ones whose art style has changed drastically for the worse. Some artists change their style and call it progression, some get old and their art declines, some just get sloppy. Some artists like Curt Swan were amazing in quality until the end. Sure, tastes change over the years but not a factor for me, good art is good art and the same for writing.

[Kai "the spy"]

Of course, it should also be noted that there still are a couple of greats from the 80s and 90s are still around and produce quality work for the big 2. Mark Waid, Kurt Busiek, Warren Ellis, Grant Morrison, Chuck Dixon (whom I mentioned before), Paul Pelletier, Kelley Jones, Keith Giffen, Dan Jurgens, Ron Marz, Garth Ennis, Greg Capullo, Tony Daniel, Dan Abnett, Liam Sharp, ... You get the point.

[KurtW95]

You really think current comics are crap?

Obviously there is some crap now - as there always has been - but really, the standard is much higher now. Brian K Vaughan, Tom King, Joe Hill, Ed Brubaker, Greg Rucka, Robert Kirkman, Grant Morrison, Garth Ennis, Rob Williams, Dave Lapham, Warren Ellis, Jeff Lemire etc. There's some great stuff out there, and it's way better than the vast majority of what was produced in the past.

If it's not to your tastes, that's fair enough, but that doesn't make it crap.

I’m talking about the majority of comics today and a majority of the writers you listed don’t work for the big two. And aside from Brubaker, I would say that most of the creators you listed are subpar to average. Not great. Certainly not better than any random selection of creators from the 90s or prior. That’s the test right there choose any random selection of titles from the big two now and compare them to a random selection of 80s and 90s comics. It’s not even a contest. Today’s comics are a joke.

[Carabas]

That’s the test right there choose any random selection of titles from the big two now and compare them to a random selection of 80s and 90s comics. It’s not even a contest. Today’s comics are a joke.

They're mostly crap, but they were mostly crap in the 60's, 70's, 80's, and 90's (especially the 90's) as well.

Sturgeon's law applies.

Of course most of the really good stuff is found outside the Big Two.

[Zero Hunter]

I’m talking about the majority of comics today and a majority of the writers you listed don’t work for the big two. And aside from Brubaker, I would say that most of the creators you listed are subpar to average. Not great. Certainly not better than any random selection of creators from the 90s or prior. That’s the test right there choose any random selection of titles from the big two now and compare them to a random selection of 80s and 90s comics. It’s not even a contest. Today’s comics are a joke.

Dude I read a lot of comics in the 90's and there was WAY more crap then there is now. It is by and large know as the worst decade for comics for a reason. That is not even up for debate. Sure there was some great stuff too but there was also a huge amount of garbage. The big 2 were riding that bubble so hard putting out as many books as they could and they didn't care if the people they hired had talent or not. You look at some books and the art in those books is just not in any sense good, but they could meet a deadline so they go the job. Marvel had many artists that made Rob Liefeld look like George Perez in comparison.

[KurtW95]

We’re really only talking about the the big two here though. And I’m not saying there wasn’t crap in the 90s, but today’s average makes 90s crap look like masterpieces by comparison. But for real, if you take five random titles from the past couple of years and compare it with five random titles from the 80s and 90s, it’s not even close.

[dancj]

We’re really only talking about the the big two here though. And I’m not saying there wasn’t crap in the 90s, but today’s average makes 90s crap look like masterpieces by comparison. But for real, if you take five random titles from the past couple of years and compare it with five random titles from the 80s and 90s, it’s not even close.

You're right, it's not close. The five random titles from now would thrash the ones from the 80s and 90s.

[numberthirty]

We’re really only talking about the the big two here though. And I’m not saying there wasn’t crap in the 90s, but today’s average makes 90s crap look like masterpieces by comparison. But for real, if you take five random titles from the past couple of years and compare it with five random titles from the 80s and 90s, it’s not even close.

The eighties asked me to fill you in on that you might be way, way off base.