Fans more Interested in Old DC than Current DC?

[DCStu]

Funnily enough lately I've been having a big long think. Do I really need to read EVERYTHING NEW DC does? I'm thinking of seriously curtailing my comic buying and just sticking with reprints of old stuff and carrying on with Batman and Superman. Fun of it all has gone for me lately.

[Jadeb]

At the risk of sounding like a prude, I find a lot of the current stuff too violent and ugly. I don't need pages soaked in blood, or to have to sit through another rape scene because the writer can't figure out a more sophisticated way to create drama. Seeing characters slaughtered never had much appeal, but it's gone entirely now that it's so routine. DC seems to think that's mature storytelling, but it usually strikes me as very juvenile.

[Zero Hunter]

I think the big thing is the writing style of today is just not as good. I am talking about everything being written for the trade type mentality with neat little 6 issue arcs with no real sub plots or character development. That and most of the time in the old days writers would stick around longer on a book so they could have over arching plots. It is getting better now, but for a long 10 year period that was more the standard then the exception especially at Marvel, and now a lot of the writers who were at Marvel in the period are now at DC and they brought their bad habits with them which in my opinion is why DC is in such a tailspin these days. I am sure if you got started reading comics with guys like Bendis or Millar then you would think that is how it should be done.

[Tzigone]

At the risk of sounding like a prude, I find a lot of the current stuff too violent and ugly. I don't need pages soaked in blood, or to have to sit through another rape scene because the writer can't figure out a more sophisticated way to create drama. Seeing characters slaughtered never had much appeal, but it's gone entirely now that it's so routine. DC seems to think that's mature storytelling, but it usually strikes me as very juvenile.

I agree. There's two separate issues for me, I think. Gore and scale.

A lot "more violent" violence. More explicit. Often more horrific, just for shock value. I'm past the point now, where something being marked "for mature readers" is an extreme disincentive for me to read it. I'll just read about it from others, thanks. Add in cannibalism, child molestation, child murder, torture, etc. for villains. It's not enjoyable for me to read. I'm not saying these things should never exist (I think people-eating worked for King Shark, but he's only half human, so I'm unsure how that counts on cannibalism scale), but they often seemed to be tacked on to the villains that never previously did them, just to make them more shocking. But then inconsistently applied.

City-wide destructions seemed big from 90s on (really, maybe the 80s, with Invasion?), and I'm tired of that, too. Now it's like lots of people die all the time, it seems. In the very old days, the Joker killed a few people when he showed up - a murderer from the first. But later it became city-wide attacks and so forth. And he's hardly the only one. There seems a constant drive to go "bigger" on death, destruction, etc.

[Jadeb]

I agree. There's two separate issues for me, I think. Gore and scale.

A lot "more violent" violence. More explicit. Often more horrific, just for shock value. I'm past the point now, where something being marked "for mature readers" is an extreme disincentive for me to read it. I'll just read about it from others, thanks. Add in cannibalism, child molestation, child murder, torture, etc. for villains. It's not enjoyable for me to read. I'm not saying these things should never exist (I think people-eating worked for King Shark, but he's only half human, so I'm unsure how that counts on cannibalism scale), but they often seemed to be tacked on to the villains that never previously did them, just to make them more shocking. But then inconsistently applied.

City-wide destructions seemed big from 90s on (really, maybe the 80s, with Invasion?), and I'm tired of that, too. Now it's like lots of people die all the time, it seems. In the very old days, the Joker killed a few people when he showed up - a murderer from the first. But later it became city-wide attacks and so forth. And he's hardly the only one. There seems a constant drive to go "bigger" on death, destruction, etc.

I just watched the Titans show, and it reminded me very much of the highs and lows of DC’s current print output: There were some interesting ideas, and I liked that it could tackle adult themes, but all the murder, violence and sheer unpleasantness eventually made it a slog. By the time they brought in child sex abuse, I wasn’t sure why I was watching. This is fun?

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

Also, the comic book sales for June 2019. Worth noting is that based on that, the most successful comic superhero that's not by Marvel or DC is Spawn, which managed to make it to the top 20:

https://www.comichron.com/monthlycom...9/2019-06.html

The question then, I guess, at this point is: is this enough to wake DC up?

It's obvious that the direction they're taking is not consistent with the one set out by Rebirth. As far as I'm concerned, the people who engineered the worst-selling time in DC's history (New 52) and have such contempt for classic DC characters should not be in charge now.

[Fromper]

For me? It's just DC. For the past two years, I have never read more Marvel than I have now. Since Celbuski has taken the reigns, I LOVE what they are putting out. There truly is a book for everyone right now. Traditionally, the only Marvel titles I paid attention to were Daredevil & Spider-Man. Now I am reading: Venom, Silver Surfer, Guardians of The Galaxy, Immortal Hulk (one of the BEST titles I have EVER read).
Other companies, IDW's Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles is probably the strongest one TMNT has had since it's original run back in the 80s. I haven't read much from Dark Horse or Image lately, so I can't really speak to their current titles.

Image is probably the best it's ever been over last 10 years imo.

Darkhorse is consistently rock solid with nice range of books in my experience. I can always find something to read in their line up.

Every company has its highs and lows. That's why I was asking if people thought it was just DC that's bad now, or if it's a trend in comics in general.

When I started reading comics in the early 90s, I started by reading my friends' comics before I got into buying my own. They were reading mostly DC. When I asked why, they said that they used to read more Marvel, but DC was just putting out the best work at the moment. Then, Zero Hour came along, with its new reader friendly month of #0 issues, and I jumped into buying my own. Here we are 25 years later, and it's exactly the opposite.

But because I read more DC than others throughout the 90s and early 00s, roughly 3/4 of my collection is DC. So getting back into comics, my first thought was to check on the characters I know. But if I do decide to start reading new comics again, my first question will be "So what's good these days, regardless of publisher?"

But after initially looking into what's up with modern comics, and deciding NOT to dive in, I've decided that I really do want to finish a full reread of my old collection first. That will likely take another year or more, due to sheer quantity.

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

I just watched the Titans show, and it reminded me very much of the highs and lows of DC’s current print output: There were some interesting ideas, and I liked that it could tackle adult themes, but all the murder, violence and sheer unpleasantness eventually made it a slog. By the time they brought in child sex abuse, I wasn’t sure why I was watching. This is fun?

Say what you will about Titans, but at least it embraces the classic elements of the Titans that made the franchise such a success. It's not fun and that's fine. It's not supposed to be fun. But it does show the strong bond between the characters that are at the heart of the Titans.

[Dark-Jacket]

So to all those responding that they prefer the older stuff, and don't like DC's current books: Is it just DC, or are other comic publishers just as bad? Have you looked at anything from Marvel, Image, Dark Horse, or any other publisher recently? Do they have the same problems?

I really am curious. I haven't looked at any comic published in the last 15 years, so I have no standard for comparison.

I don't read much comics from any company, I'm trying to get back on the train but haven't appreciated much of what I've seen.
(Marvel DH and stuff)

For the most part, I'm the same way with Marvel. Their comics have also, in my opinion, grown much more cynical.

The fact that modern comics has taken a serious turn towards being a propaganda tool for Left and Far Left politics is also a problem. Even if you 100% agree with the political views put forth, I'd think the echo chamber would get tiresome. Plus, everyone needs a break from politics in order to maintain some sanity and perspective. Sadly, such a break is increasingly difficult to find in entertainment. Marvel and DC both do this, but I think Marvel does it more.

I don't think comics are more a propaganda than before. For all purposes, they were created as propaganda, but it has been more subtle during the bronze age and better executed.
The current people in the business are either ascended fanboys (not that's a bad thing) or from other medias and doesn't all have what it takes to write comic books.

When I see Tom King saying Wally is one of his favorite character and then read Heroes in Crisis, I can't help but think something is wrong with how people are creating contents right now.

[Restingvoice]

I don't read much comics from any company, I'm trying to get back on the train but haven't appreciated much of what I've seen.
(Marvel DH and stuff)







I don't think comics are more a propaganda than before. For all purposes, they were created as propaganda, but it has been more subtle during the bronze age and better executed.
The current people in the business are either ascended fanboys (not that's a bad thing) or from other medias and doesn't all have what it takes to write comic books.

When I see Tom King saying Wally is one of his favorite character and then read Heroes in Crisis, I can't help but think something is wrong with how people are creating contents right now.

He said he likes to break the characters he likes because he wants to see them overcome the worst or something like that.

[Lee Stone]

I agree. There's two separate issues for me, I think. Gore and scale.

A lot "more violent" violence. More explicit. Often more horrific, just for shock value. I'm past the point now, where something being marked "for mature readers" is an extreme disincentive for me to read it. I'll just read about it from others, thanks. Add in cannibalism, child molestation, child murder, torture, etc. for villains. It's not enjoyable for me to read. I'm not saying these things should never exist (I think people-eating worked for King Shark, but he's only half human, so I'm unsure how that counts on cannibalism scale), but they often seemed to be tacked on to the villains that never previously did them, just to make them more shocking. But then inconsistently applied.

City-wide destructions seemed big from 90s on (really, maybe the 80s, with Invasion?), and I'm tired of that, too. Now it's like lots of people die all the time, it seems. In the very old days, the Joker killed a few people when he showed up - a murderer from the first. But later it became city-wide attacks and so forth. And he's hardly the only one. There seems a constant drive to go "bigger" on death, destruction, etc.

And I agree with you.

For me personally, it’s not so much the subject matter as much as the approach.

For example, even though the rape in Watchmen was still a bit graphic, it wasn’t near as graphic as the one in Identity Crisis.

People get killed in comics all the time. It’s been happening since the Golden Age.
But it’s not necessary to show graphic details like headshots, decapitations, impalings and guts ripped out.
I get that some people may get their jollies by seeing these things, but there are tasteful ways to tell the same stories.

As for myself, there are many reasons I prefer the older comics.

1. Art
Less cgi-style art, meaning everything isn’t obviously ran through photoshop and given excessive lighting tones and gradient coloring. I like my colors flat.
I also like my art with fewer but thicker lines, which is complete opposite of the more modern Jim Lee clones.

2. Writing
In the Classic DC era, you had one-and-done stories and you had a few titles that kept an ongoing narrative.
Today, those one-and-done stories are often inflated and padded to spread out over six issues.
And those titles with ongoing narratives would have to have all the subplots reach a conclusion before the end of each six-issue arc.
Both of these changes are due to the focus on writing for the trade.

3. Characters
A lot of the characters I like rarely get seen anymore.
And when they do, they either act completely out of character or they’re just being used as cannon fodder.

4. Agendas
In the Classic era of comics, there may have been agendas but they were much more subdued.
Today, a lot of people are focusing more on their own personal agendas than on just telling a good story.
I don’t read comics for politics and social awareness. At least not social awareness that hits you on the head.
It makes it where modern comics can sometimes feel weighted down with excessive baggage.
One of my favorite comics is a Captain America issue from 1982 where Cap helps an old friend save his partner.
It doesn’t hit you over the head, but it’s plain to see and them being reunited causes Cap to finally let his wall down with Bernie and let her in.

5. Personal lives with fully formed non-super supporting characters and regular subplots
It seems that in more recent years, the focus of comics has moved more towards what I call WWE Superheroes.
I think this is because a lot of overlap exists between comics fandom and wrestling fandom.
I have seen less non-supers being supporting characters or love interests in comics. Supers seem to keep to themselves these days.
Almost every person they interact with is a fellow super. And they rarely date outside the super bubble.

[Tzigone]

4. Agendas
In the Classic era of comics, there may have been agendas but they were much more subdued.
Today, a lot of people are focusing more on their own personal agendas than on just telling a good story.
I don’t read comics for politics and social awareness. At least not social awareness that hits you on the head.

That's been a thing since at least the 1960s with X-Men and the 1970s in DC (heck, late 1960s). Heck, the WWII era was extremely overt with it. I don't mind an agenda. As long a as good story is told. Even in the 1970s, some just weren't good stories. I'd agree with the politics or message, but there were issues read like after-school specials. Same with 1980s and drugs. 1990s had guns and teen pregnancy issues in the Robin that were very moralizing. I mean there are absolutely older stories that were "hit you over the head" and "anvil-like" when it came to subtlety.

A lot of people act like this is some new thing in comics, but it's not. There were issues dealing with racism and sexism and Vietnam war protests at least as early as the late 1960s. The "us v. them" of youth and adults, etc. Poverty and political will in the early Superman stories and how to turn around child criminals in early Batman. And let's not even talk about WWII. Politics and social commentary and "agendas" in superhero comics are very old. And there have, at least since the 1960s been some good stories with is skillfully woven in and some that are just moralizing and very dull. But when stories were shorter, it was easier skip over the ones that didn't interest you, I think.

I do think there are some boring, moralizing stories (quite a few where I even agree with the moral) today. Thing is, I think there were some in the 1960s-2000s, too.

[Twice-named]

5. Personal lives with fully formed non-super supporting characters and regular subplots
It seems that in more recent years, the focus of comics has moved more towards what I call WWE Superheroes.
I think this is because a lot of overlap exists between comics fandom and wrestling fandom.
I have seen less non-supers being supporting characters or love interests in comics. Supers seem to keep to themselves these days.
Almost every person they interact with is a fellow super. And they rarely date outside the super bubble.

This. A million times.

One of the reasons I loved Messner-Loebs’ Flash run was Wally’s personal life.

[DrNewGod]

Personal lives with fully formed non-super supporting characters and regular subplots
It seems that in more recent years, the focus of comics has moved more towards what I call WWE Superheroes.
I think this is because a lot of overlap exists between comics fandom and wrestling fandom.
I have seen less non-supers being supporting characters or love interests in comics. Supers seem to keep to themselves these days.
Almost every person they interact with is a fellow super. And they rarely date outside the super bubble.

Agreed. I call this "The Shrinking Of The Comic-verses." They narrow every character and event to plot-centric contributors, with all else being poorly drawn set pieces.

I'll grant you, the superheroes are the focus of these stories. Still, up until the 1990s (Get Off My Lawn!), there was a sense that superheroes existed in a world. Since then, it's been more a case that Worlds exist as a bubble surrounding superheroes. The latter has always been true, it just wasn't quite as in your face as it has become.

[Comic-Reader Lad]

That's been a thing since at least the 1960s with X-Men and the 1970s in DC (heck, late 1960s). Heck, the WWII era was extremely overt with it. I don't mind an agenda. As long a as good story is told. Even in the 1970s, some just weren't good stories. I'd agree with the politics or message, but there were issues read like after-school specials. Same with 1980s and drugs. 1990s had guns and teen pregnancy issues in the Robin that were very moralizing. I mean there are absolutely older stories that were "hit you over the head" and "anvil-like" when it came to subtlety.

A lot of people act like this is some new thing in comics, but it's not. There were issues dealing with racism and sexism and Vietnam war protests at least as early as the late 1960s. The "us v. them" of youth and adults, etc. Poverty and political will in the early Superman stories and how to turn around child criminals in early Batman. And let's not even talk about WWII. Politics and social commentary and "agendas" in superhero comics are very old. And there have, at least since the 1960s been some good stories with is skillfully woven in and some that are just moralizing and very dull. But when stories were shorter, it was easier skip over the ones that didn't interest you, I think.

I do think there are some boring, moralizing stories (quite a few where I even agree with the moral) today. Thing is, I think there were some in the 1960s-2000s, too.

Yes, there were always politics and agendas of a sort in comics. However, they weren't always this polarizing.

Using comics as anti-fascist/pro-freedom propaganda, especially once the US entered World War II, isn't exactly walking a tightrope without a net.

Likewise, an anti-drug story wouldn't generate backlash. Anti-War stories and imagery in the late 60s & early 70s would have been readily accepted by most of the comics age audience at the time.

However, in today's comics that go political, there tends to be a lot of differing reactions among the readership. Maybe that's because today's comics readers are older and have had more years to form their private political opinions. Therefore, they're more likely to notice when a writer is shoehorning his or her own political opinions into the stories, or worse, using established characters as mouthpieces for the writer's political views.