Was the '90s truly the worst decade for comic books fans?

[Astrozac]

I think the early 90s up til 1993, the year of the mega glut thanks to speculators, is where the 1990s gets a bad rap. But even then with the Death of Superman and Knightfall storylines, were actually good, with quality creative teams. And as others have mentioned there was early Vertigo and Dark Horse in that time frame. By 1995 things were looking better for mainstream superhoer comics, the rise of Kurt Busiek and Mark Waid proved that, with Marvels, Untold Tales of Spider Man, Astro City, Flash, Captain American and Kingdom Come around the corner.
There's good and bad everywhere, but the early 90s did have its fair share of crap.

[Dizzy D]

The Avengers line is pretty weak now. As a life long fan, I'm really disappointed that they became the Legion Of Superheroes of Marvel with an unlimited membership.

Even though I disagree, that's still 1 line of comics (which wasn't even a line so much during the 90s.)

[Billy Batson]

The Avengers line is pretty weak now. As a life long fan, I'm really disappointed that they became the Legion Of Superheroes of Marvel with an unlimited membership.

I think you'd enjoy Mighty Avengers if you haven't tried that one yet.

[the4thpip]

Even though I disagree, that's still 1 line of comics (which wasn't even a line so much during the 90s.)

Yeah, it's a bit like saying comics were bad in the 60s because the Batman line was not at its peak.

[General Nerditry]

I just never took any characters that had big guns seriously. Guns don't do any good against all the super powered population.

To be fair, they weren't always regular guns. They were advanced tech that could compensate against super powered folks in many cases. Also, Cable and Deadpool specifically at least were mutants with powers, as well.

I've never understood the appeal of Cable or Deadpool. Those were probably the worst additions to the X-franchise in the 90's in my opinion.

I'll grant you they started out as generic 90s "badass" stereotypes, but those two specifically at least really grew into their own and got some fantastic development once they got away from Liefield. And so the great debate over character vs creator rages on..

Say what you want about the 90s but how do you trash now? This is the best time ever for comic fans. There's more options on comic racks than ever. If you can't find comics to enjoy now then the problem is you.

It depends on perspective. I agree there is an amazing amount of variety and quality out there, but character/team fans have seen better times. The X-books are a hot, disjointed mess right now IMO, and I've heard similar grumblings about the Avengers. the X-fan in me is really disappointed with the current books, but at the same time I don't know if I've ever enjoyed comics more than some of the Image and indie titles I currently follow, so there you go.

[FanboyStranger]

I think you'd enjoy Mighty Avengers if you haven't tried that one yet.

Yeah, Mighty Avengers is head and shoulders above the rest of the Avengers team books. It's really the only one that actually feels like a classic Avengers book, even if Monica Rambeau is the only character that was traditionally associated with the Avengers. It's a lot of fun.

[banky]

It's funny how defensive some fans get when the topic of how terrible the 90s were for comic books. Of course all the millenials who were reading comics as kids back then have nice, rose-tinted memories of the era. The fact remains it was a decade filled with a glut of over-hyped bad product and was punctuated by events which nearly sunk the big 2.

I think what's more revealing are the top 100 lists which usually feature more stories/books from the 1980s than most of the other decades. I'd imagine that an aggregate of top 100 critics lists, fwiw, would rank the decades as follows:

1. 1980s - DKR, Dark Phoenix saga, days of future past, Batman Yr one etc.
2. 2000s - All star supes, Planetary, Bendis, Brubaker & Ennis best stuff
3. 1960s - the origins of marvel icons still around today
4. 1950s - EC crime, sci-fi and horror
5. 1990s - Gaiman's Sandman, the rest are bleh, some big sales numbers peaked in the early90s i guess

[Mark]

I couldn't really afford comics back in the 1990's so I can't say. I think every decade has a huge downpoint though. I guess the one thing I didn't like even from a distance were the gimic covers.

[JediMindTrick]

To anyone that says the 90's were bad I give you:

Preacher - Garth Ennis
Age of Apocalypse - Scott Lobdell and others
JLA - Grant Morrison
Flash by Mark Waid and Geoff Johns

I could go on with many more. There were some truly spectacular comics and runs in the 90's. Yes there were bad ones too but they don't outweigh the awesome ones. As I said in my first post, some of the marketing strategies like gimmick covers and such sucked but it doesn't mean the actual overall quality of the comics was any worse than any other decade.

[t hedge coke]

Am I the only one who really likes "gimmick" covers? Glow in the dark, diecut, embossed. I mean, heck, my favorite copy of Jurassic Park is the one with the embossed cover, and I love my Ada, or Ardor with its slicker center photo, but comics really ran with it for awhile there and I don't see how that doesn't also give some tactile or visual pleasure, too. Wraparounds, a line-wide portrait conceit, interlocking covers... I dig it all. Even the one they shot a bullet through.

[JediMindTrick]

Am I the only one who really likes "gimmick" covers? Glow in the dark, diecut, embossed. I mean, heck, my favorite copy of Jurassic Park is the one with the embossed cover, and I love my Ada, or Ardor with its slicker center photo, but comics really ran with it for awhile there and I don't see how that doesn't also give some tactile or visual pleasure, too. Wraparounds, a line-wide portrait conceit, interlocking covers... I dig it all. Even the one they shot a bullet through.

First one I recall encountering was Ghost Rider #15 (I think this was the issue) and it had a glow in the dark cover. It was very cool but the actions of my comic shop owner pretty much epitomized why the 90's sucked from a marketing standpoint - he started charging $10.00 a pop the day it was released to everyone except those who had the book on their pull list like me. You would have thought I'd robbed him the way he whined about me getting such a great deal in only paying cover price.

[FanboyStranger]

Am I the only one who really likes "gimmick" covers? Glow in the dark, diecut, embossed. I mean, heck, my favorite copy of Jurassic Park is the one with the embossed cover, and I love my Ada, or Ardor with its slicker center photo, but comics really ran with it for awhile there and I don't see how that doesn't also give some tactile or visual pleasure, too. Wraparounds, a line-wide portrait conceit, interlocking covers... I dig it all. Even the one they shot a bullet through.

Some of them were pretty interesting experiments. For example, glow in the covers. I loved the one for The Spectre 1 and a little known gem by Nick Abadzis and Paul Johnson from Marve UK's short-lived Frontier Line called Children of the Voyager. (Fun fact: My CotV cover still glows if you sit it out for awhile.)

On the other hand, you had some absolute messes like the fold-out cover to Force Works 1, still the worst cover enhancement ever. (The bullet through the comic was actually better, and that left you with a hole through ever page.)

[t hedge coke]

I never understood how the Force Works one was meant to work. I figured somewhere along production that one just got screwed up, like the cut/uncut pages in Black Dossier.

There was a guy in Southern California who did very low print runs in the 90s, one of which had a scratch-off cover, that once you scratched it off, said "Not Near Mint Now, Is It?" underneath.

[Shawn Hopkins]

Am I the only one who really likes "gimmick" covers? Glow in the dark, diecut, embossed. I mean, heck, my favorite copy of Jurassic Park is the one with the embossed cover, and I love my Ada, or Ardor with its slicker center photo, but comics really ran with it for awhile there and I don't see how that doesn't also give some tactile or visual pleasure, too. Wraparounds, a line-wide portrait conceit, interlocking covers... I dig it all. Even the one they shot a bullet through.

I like them, but I didn't like them enough to justify the extra expense they usually added to the comic. I like picking them up in dollar and quarter bins, though.

What about that Eclipso cover with the fake gem that most people lost?

I never understood how the Force Works one was meant to work. I figured somewhere along production that one just got screwed up, like the cut/uncut pages in Black Dossier.

There was a guy in Southern California who did very low print runs in the 90s, one of which had a scratch-off cover, that once you scratched it off, said "Not Near Mint Now, Is It?" underneath.

The Force Works cover kinda works if you fold it out very carefully. But even if you get it right it's kind of dumb, and it's easy to tear. Also, forget about closing it back. There's another pop-up cover from about that time, from Sergio Aragones Mighty Magnor, that had the same fragility problem. I tore that one trying to open it.

[Conch22]

It's funny how defensive some fans get when the topic of how terrible the 90s were for comic books. Of course all the millenials who were reading comics as kids back then have nice, rose-tinted memories of the era. The fact remains it was a decade filled with a glut of over-hyped bad product and was punctuated by events which nearly sunk the big 2.

I think what's more revealing are the top 100 lists which usually feature more stories/books from the 1980s than most of the other decades. I'd imagine that an aggregate of top 100 critics lists, fwiw, would rank the decades as follows:

1. 1980s - DKR, Dark Phoenix saga, days of future past, Batman Yr one etc.
2. 2000s - All star supes, Planetary, Bendis, Brubaker & Ennis best stuff
3. 1960s - the origins of marvel icons still around today
4. 1950s - EC crime, sci-fi and horror
5. 1990s - Gaiman's Sandman, the rest are bleh, some big sales numbers peaked in the early90s i guess

The 1990s gave us the entire x-men line of books, wherein I personally really consider that the defining era of that series and enjoyed the bulk of the series and storylines, which, when considering the amount of books and crossovers, is quite impressive.

Morrisons JLA, despite some terrible dialog, remains one of the greatest runs for that team. Witchblade and the Darkness debuted in the mid 90s and I personally love both, particularly the Darkness! And Spawn is enjoyable, despite being a blend of punisher and Ghost Rider wrapped up as a nightmarish reflection of spiderman and superman.

Also, vertigo titles like the invisibles, preacher & Hellblazer all had fantastic runs. You mentioned Sandman already. The big 2 have felt more commercialized and hollow in recent years than the worst 90s had to offer. Maybe the teens will replace the 90s as "official" worst decade.

Again, don't forget kingdom come and Marvels, if your looking for that frank miller batwork/ watchmen litmus test to compare and contrast. The frank Miller batman stories, despite their virtues, feel very proto SinCity to me, as if he had the idea and loved it so much he warped preexisting characters instead of growing them naturally.