Which DC run/story considered a "Classic" did you never understand the hype?

[SJNeal]

FINAL CRISIS. I do not get how anyone loves or even likes it. It had so much potential as this fantastic New Gods story and then WHAM! as jarring as the art change was from JG Jones to DM we all of a sudden are in a story about Vampire Monitors. I felt like I read half of two stories. Just didn't fit.

Also, I don't remember , but was it ever explained how Batmans dead body was in the present and he ended up alive and well in the past?

Because... omega beams? *shrug*

[SiegePerilous02]

I will die on the hill that the best modern Joker writer isn’t Snyder, and it’s not Morrison either, it’s Tom King. Joker threatening to kill himself unless Batman makes him his best man is the funniest most f***** up Joker story I have read in ages. It actually made me laugh at how ridiculous it was, which is exactly how Joker should be.

Eh, I'm not too wild about the execution (shooting up a church) but the idea is definitely lol worthy.

I like Morrison's better (more so the B&R section than R.I.P), but King's is still better than Snyder's. Though Paul Dini is still #1 modern Joker writer for me

FINAL CRISIS. I do not get how anyone loves or even likes it. It had so much potential as this fantastic New Gods story and then WHAM! as jarring as the art change was from JG Jones to DM we all of a sudden are in a story about Vampire Monitors. I felt like I read half of two stories. Just didn't fit.

Also, I don't remember , but was it ever explained how Batmans dead body was in the present and he ended up alive and well in the past?

Because... omega beams? *shrug*

That wasn't Bruce's body in the present. It was a failed clone created in Simyan and Mokarri's lab that Darkseid used as a decoy so they wouldn't think to look for Bruce in the past.

Granted, this was in Morrison's Batman run, I don't know if it actually is touched on in Final Crisis. Which doesn't help it as a self contained work.

[iron chimp]

Yeah, I more or less said that in a previous post, just not in those words. "There are lots of comics I'm not enthused about, but if they're comics that have been talked up by comic book fans, I usually know why."

Everyone's free to like what they like, but I'm intellectually curious enough to try and figure out why certain comic books trended in the past. That's been a lifelong preoccupation.

I don't think there are many comic books that have gotten a lot of "hype." To me when a studio promotes a major motion picture before its release, across all media, with actors doing interviews and T.V. spots and putting so much pressure on the masses that one feels like if they don't see this movie in its opening week then they'll be hopelessly out of touch with the zeitgeist--that's hype.

If you asked the public, they wouldn't know very many comic books that are considered "must reads" by fans--they mainly know them through the movie adaptations (especially anything Marvel, not D.C.). Perhaps WATCHMEN--but even that seems rather esoteric for the man on the street--it's still an eclectic book for special people.

A lot of the comics we're talking about were not successful--they never got a big push or if they did get it (the Green Lantern/Green Arrow stories got some attention in mass market newspapers), it didn't help their sales and they were quickly cancelled. D.C. has a long list of critically important comics that were nevetheless dumped and never gained much of a readership.

The reason that a groundswell of fan conversation developed around these short-lived, often experimental, projects was because those fans despaired of them ever being remembered. Readers wanted to push them, because they were important to them. Even with this push, a lot of really great writing and art has fallen through the cracks and no one remembers it. The comic book fans of D.C. have very little power--they are not that significant enough to give a comic book real hype of the kind that impresses the masses.

Even with Marvel, fame is fleeting. I remember when FANTASTIC FOUR was considered the greatest comic book on the racks. The Thing was so popular as a character--he was like the Wolverine of the day--that he would be used to promote other characters. Especially in his team-ups in MARVEL TWO-IN-ONE. Look how the mighty have fallen. The average person if they know of the Fantastic Four they know of them from failed movies. The Galactus Trilogy was considered one of the greatest comic book stories of all time by comic book readers--and the Silver Surfer the Hamlet of super-heroes. Now? Oh, such a fall was there--

"Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal Wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away.”

I'd say loads of books got hype in 90s - image, valiant, x-men relaunch, spiderman relaunch - these were books with big build ups in the press and in mainstream media.

but i'd say there are two sorts of hype - company hype that may or may not have delievered - and reader hype - books that became lauded over time because of word of mouth.

[LordMikel]

Yeah, I more or less said that in a previous post, just not in those words. "There are lots of comics I'm not enthused about, but if they're comics that have been talked up by comic book fans, I usually know why."

Everyone's free to like what they like, but I'm intellectually curious enough to try and figure out why certain comic books trended in the past. That's been a lifelong preoccupation.

I don't think there are many comic books that have gotten a lot of "hype." To me when a studio promotes a major motion picture before its release, across all media, with actors doing interviews and T.V. spots and putting so much pressure on the masses that one feels like if they don't see this movie in its opening week then they'll be hopelessly out of touch with the zeitgeist--that's hype.

If you asked the public, they wouldn't know very many comic books that are considered "must reads" by fans--they mainly know them through the movie adaptations (especially anything Marvel, not D.C.). Perhaps WATCHMEN--but even that seems rather esoteric for the man on the street--it's still an eclectic book for special people.

A lot of the comics we're talking about were not successful--they never got a big push or if they did get it (the Green Lantern/Green Arrow stories got some attention in mass market newspapers), it didn't help their sales and they were quickly cancelled. D.C. has a long list of critically important comics that were nevetheless dumped and never gained much of a readership.

The reason that a groundswell of fan conversation developed around these short-lived, often experimental, projects was because those fans despaired of them ever being remembered. Readers wanted to push them, because they were important to them. Even with this push, a lot of really great writing and art has fallen through the cracks and no one remembers it. The comic book fans of D.C. have very little power--they are not that significant enough to give a comic book real hype of the kind that impresses the masses.

Even with Marvel, fame is fleeting. I remember when FANTASTIC FOUR was considered the greatest comic book on the racks. The Thing was so popular as a character--he was like the Wolverine of the day--that he would be used to promote other characters. Especially in his team-ups in MARVEL TWO-IN-ONE. Look how the mighty have fallen. The average person if they know of the Fantastic Four they know of them from failed movies. The Galactus Trilogy was considered one of the greatest comic book stories of all time by comic book readers--and the Silver Surfer the Hamlet of super-heroes. Now? Oh, such a fall was there--

"Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal Wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away.”

I almost responded to your first post, and I'm glad now I did not. Since I very much took it to mean, "people don't understand why this story is important and that is why they don't like it. If they understood more about why it was important, they would like it." So I'm glad I didn't respond now.

[SJNeal]

I almost responded to your first post, and I'm glad now I did not. Since I very much took it to mean, "people don't understand why this story is important and that is why they don't like it. If they understood more about why it was important, they would like it." So I'm glad I didn't respond now.

Very much like the criticism Morrison's fans lob at his non-fans: "If you don't like it, it probably went over your head".



Not saying you personally do/did this, just a casual observation.

[Jim Kelly]

I'd say loads of books got hype in 90s - image, valiant, x-men relaunch, spiderman relaunch - these were books with big build ups in the press and in mainstream media.

but i'd say there are two sorts of hype - company hype that may or may not have delievered - and reader hype - books that became lauded over time because of word of mouth.

I still don't think that the hype was strong in those days and permeated beyond the comic book readership and the speculator market. One big exception was the "Death of Superman." The hype for that comic book was real--everyone bought that comic (making it worthless). Different members of my family ran out to buy it for me, believing it was really valuable (I think I have seven copies of that one comic--they're all in a box somewhere).

Others that would be hyped are the Death of Robin story and Superman gets a new costume story. Also when Superman gave up his American citizenship (in really a nothing story), a lot of people got up in arms about that and probably ran out to buy it just so they could burn it in the public square.

[Lee Stone]

I'd say loads of books got hype in 90s - image, valiant, x-men relaunch, spiderman relaunch - these were books with big build ups in the press and in mainstream media.

but i'd say there are two sorts of hype - company hype that may or may not have delievered - and reader hype - books that became lauded over time because of word of mouth.

The '90s... The age of Wizard and Hero Illustrated.
Both of which preferred to hype Marvel over DC, until Image formed and it became their favorite.
A lot of Image's early success is due to those two magazines.

[Menacer]

Restorative Nostalgia pushes back against the here and now, keeping us stuck trying to relive our glory days.

A huge group of old dogs stuck in the 70s exists on this forum to the detriment of quality new modern books... its shocking

[Gaius]

Let’s throw a little more gasoline in here:

Azzarelo’s Joker - I’ve seen this book rated highly and I’ve never understood why. It’s just as empty and awful as Damned, just pure Azz edge with nothing interesting to say. The taunt from Batman to Joker is ok I guess, but it also just feels kinda childish? Nowhere near as impactful as Superman’s rebuttal to Lex in the far superior Luthor imo. It’s just empty “badassery” bravado.
.

TBH, I'd say most of "classic Joker" stories like Joker and TKJ I've never considered all that good because focusing in on him as a main character just highlight what an uncharismatic and shallow bore I find him.

He's really only interesting in non-comics media as they could get an entertaining/charismatic actor or voice actor to get something out of him or just ripoff Travis Bickle.

[HsssH]

Tomasi Superman - Before Black Dawn, Multiplicity was a massive flop, a multiversal team up of Supermen should’ve been a slam dunk. Instead they were wasted on a boring ass villain that was even more forgettable than Rogal Zaar, and with terrible filler art. After Black Dawn the whole run fell off a cliff, the family vacation was godawful, Imperious Lex reset Lex back to being a villain, tons of crap filler stories with boring house style art. At least Tomasi ended strong with the Bizarro arc, and issue 45 is legit fantastic, but he was clearly running out of gas and simply couldn’t keep up with book idea wise. Ultimately it’s an ok run but nowhere near the masterpiece it’s fans say it is imo.

Is it really a "classic"? I think that some people just praise it as a response to Bendis run. Asides of Super sons and New Super-Man (and maybe Olsen since I haven't tried it) all Rebirth Superman comics have been trash.

[Alpha]

Regardless of the hate a lot of people have for Tom King, he really went from the plot formulaic Scott Snyder hype machine we no pay off (other than Zero Year) to an attempt at exploring the character in a sincere way. I think the panel in "Thr Button" where Thomas Wayne tells Bruce he never wanted him to be Batman, and which he could be happy is something we've needed for decades. I think over the decades new people will look back and read the conversations in those stories and see that he tried something really dangerous in that run, to make the modern Batman happy. Ignoring the wedding issue, up until the end of Cold Hearts (which I think was issue 55) the run was amazing. Yes he really squandered it after the fact, and honestly, had no pay off, but what he did before that was some genuine development.

[SiegePerilous02]

A huge group of old dogs stuck in the 70s exists on this forum to the detriment of quality new modern books... its shocking

It's not really catering just to 70s nostalgia that can cut new books short or stagnate directions. Nostalgia for the late 80s/90s Superman (especially the Byrne run) has been hampering Superman off and on for a while and preventing some experimentation. Grayson got cut short to capitalize on nostalgia for the 90s/2000s Dixion Nightwing days, the writer for Nightwing left because he grew disinterested in that direction, and eventually we get stuff like Dick getting shot in the head and in a worse spot than he was in before.

[John Venus]

FINAL CRISIS. I do not get how anyone loves or even likes it. It had so much potential as this fantastic New Gods story and then WHAM! as jarring as the art change was from JG Jones to DM we all of a sudden are in a story about Vampire Monitors. I felt like I read half of two stories. Just didn't fit.

Also, I don't remember , but was it ever explained how Batmans dead body was in the present and he ended up alive and well in the past?

Like another poster said, that was a failed Batman clone and not the original Batman.

FC was meant to be the culmination of what Morrison was doing in Seven Soldiers and his Batman run. It was never meant to be a Crisis event ala COIE or IC.

[Jim Kelly]

A huge group of old dogs stuck in the 70s exists on this forum to the detriment of quality new modern books... its shocking

From the time I was seven years old, I was always asking myself questions about the comic books I was reading. I would look at reprints of old stories and wonder why Batman looked like that. I was always trying to find out stuff about the history of comic books--from decades before I was ever born. Understanding all that, learning about how comic books are made and why artists do the things they do and what market forces dictate which comics become successful, all that helps me to better appreciate the new comics as they come out.

Frankly, I think you're missing half the greatness of the latest comic books if you don't know something about the history of the medium and the comic books that defined their times. Because any good writer or artist is using their understanding of comics to create the new work.

It's like with movies--you can watch the latest movie and have a good time, but if you know something about film history, you get more out of the experience. I don't know why some fans feel compelled to use "nostalgia" like it's a dirty word. And looking back at your history isn't nostalgia--it's a way to locate yourself in the present moment and appreciate the world around you.

[SiegePerilous02]

From the time I was seven years old, I was always asking myself questions about the comic books I was reading. I would look at reprints of old stories and wonder why Batman looked like that. I was always trying to find out stuff about the history of comic books--from decades before I was ever born. Understanding all that, learning about how comic books are made and why artists do the things they do and what market forces dictate which comics become successful, all that helps me to better appreciate the new comics as they come out.

Frankly, I think you're missing half the greatness of the latest comic books if you don't know something about the history of the medium and the comic books that defined their times. Because any good writer or artist is using their understanding of comics to create the new work.

It's like with movies--you can watch the latest movie and have a good time, but if you know something about film history, you get more out of the experience. I don't know why some fans feel compelled to use "nostalgia" like it's a dirty word. And looking back at your history isn't nostalgia--it's a way to locate yourself in the present moment and appreciate the world around you.

I think it's because fans believe it is a way for newer developments that build off of old stuff organically (YMMV on that, at least case by case basis) and provide new things in the name of recapturing the magic of the old days, often the ones the creators in question grew up with.

Not that I think it's as simple as "Silver/Bronze" age nostalgia, that is overly simplistic hyperbole. The mere presence of some characters like Barry, Hal, Babrara as Batgirl or Kara does not suddenly transport us back to the 70s as if those characters could only exist then. Yeah we got Batgirl back, but instead of doing a clean reboot and giving us a new version of Barbara Gordon, they kept TKJ in continuity and created an in-between take that really satisfied nobody. Barry came back at the expense of Wally which was bad enough but classic Barry fans didn't like the changes to Barry either. And if the nostalgia for the bronze age was really as strong as people claim, Dick Grayson's generation of sidekicks wouldn't be consistently screwed over in favor of creating more teen heroes because they were the Bronze age characters.

Plus, while the majority of flawed nostalgia reasoning in creative decisions at DC is probably rooted in the Silver/Bronze age, it is not the only era. Ex: the Multiverse never really takes off anymore despite some half assed attempts to kickstart it, they can't run away from old school Superman fast enough so they keep circling back to the bland Byrne model, etc.