Support NeoGAF

[IrishNinja]

Alan Moore is the most overrated writer of all time. I always find it funny that people make fun of Rob Liefeld and Image Comics of the 90s and don't realize Moore was writing half that shit. He got lucky with Watchmen and his whole gimmick that he was writing dark weird stuff at a time when comics were still conservative and treated as children entertainment just like Frankie Miller.

Grant Morrison on the other hand is actually a good writer. Seven Soldiers alone is better than anything moore shitted out including watchmen.

I'll read Seven Soldiers, if you'll read Miracle Man.

 

[Veelk]

A good place to start in order to understand why people like Flex Mentallo is David Brothers' "Gamble a Stamp" series. It's 4 pieces getting into what makes it work as, and I'm liberally quoting the opening paragraph of the first article here, "a story, comics journalism, a history lesson and auto-critique in pamphlet form". It even addresses most of the points you have raised.

I'll read it when I have time, but I doubt they'll turn me around on "Just be optimistic man!" dick waving he pulled.

But since you didn't like All-Star Superman, I feel your opinion should be null and void.

It's tripe. Utter tripe. Probably the comic I dislike most by him, really, since that was the one I went into with expectations of greatness. Then I read it.

That said, it still speaks volumes on Alan Moore's character that he was the one to pull the lengthy tirade of seething anger unprovoked after being asked about the use of rape as a plot device in his writing, presumably because Morrison had spoken out on the very subject at some point. As this was claimed by many to be Moore's last interview ever, let's hope this was just him taking this thing out in a blaze of glory to encourage us to stop ever paying attention to anything he might say and just buy whatever LXG book he's got coming out.

I haven't read the thing, since it's so damn long, but yeah, going off on that kind of tangent sucks, even if Moore has legitimate reasons to disdain Morrison.

 

[ChubbyHuggs]

Yea, it's pretty decent eh? I like Venditti. Have you read either of his Surrogates books? I prefer them both to THD. I really really like the original Surrogates book. I understand doing big two work will allow him to do more creator owned work (if he wants of course) in the lnog run, but I can't wait for him to do some more, really like his own stuff. The books he's attached to at DC though, not really my thing. Would have liked to have seen his Constantine. The only other top shelf book I can recommend is The Underwater Welder by Lemire, really cool If you just like different original stuff in general, Habibi is worth a look in.

I was hoping for a better ending all things considered, but it was still good. I still haven't read those. I was eye ballin' Liar's Kiss, have you read that one?

 

[Jedeye Sniv]

Sounds good, I'm enjoying Zero Year but can't wait to see what's up next

Ehh, I could have easily waited for Zero Year to finish up. DC is all about fucking with it's own momentum lately. Just tell the damn story you were telling you ADD fucks

 

[Jedeye Sniv]

So I just read Flex Mentallo, since I heard lots of good things about it and the recent Morrison vs Moore debate sparked my interest since it's supposed to be his response to watchmen somehow.

And at the end, I have no idea why I keep giving this guy a chance. Maybe with all his popularity, I am trying to get whatever it is everyone likes about him to click with me, but I've yet to read any story by him that wasn't mediocre, less than mediocre, or just flat out incomprehensible.

Flex Mentallo mostly falls into the latter catergory. Admittedly, I am a bit tired and I literally just read it over the past hour so maybe I haven't had time to reflect on it yet, but my immediate impressions are this: The majority of it came off as nothing but him whining that comics aren't like he personally likes them to be and there was some nonsense about the world ending for reasons I don't recall being informed of. It's not that his message of optimism doesn't have some merit, but I could never tolerate people who completely dismiss pessimistic or optimistic perspectives and Morrison does exactly that to the former. It's obnoxious enough that it's tempting to dislike the comic on general principle but that's unnecessary since it's the majority of it was dull on principle, with random things happening that barely made any sense whatsoever. I'm sure they have some symbolism or whatever excuse people come up for him this time. The best and most interesting thing it talks about is how our ideas shape us and how superheroes conform to those ideas, but it's far too buried deep in the narrative gibberish that is Morrison's trade mark.

I just don't get it, clearly. Maybe there is some hidden trick to reading Morrison's stuff the right way that will prove why everything he writes is solid gold, but I just don't see it. I've read Arkham Asylum, All Star Superman, a quarter of his Batman run, and now this, and nothing he has written has ever reached greater heights than 'okay', usually falling far shorter than that. I don't think he's merely overrated, he's flat out bad with a huge fanbase that I cannot comprehend for the life of me. He is the stephanie meyer of comic books, except with a much wider fanbase and a lot more drugs. And as for his dispute with Moore, I don't really know their full history, but someone commented that he's basically been trolling Moore for the past 20 years. If that's true, I don't see how its unreasonable that Moore just told him that he could fuck off.

A couple of points - first, linking Morrison, weirdness and drugs is just really damn lazy and makes you sound either stupid or naive.

It really does seem that the core themes of the book sailed right over your head. Personally I find them very affecting - the childish innocence of comic books juxtaposed next to the messy and imperfect lives we grow for ourselves as we get older being parallelled with the comics industry's faltering attempts to grow up along with its readership who are by turns either emotionally and intellectually stunted, or desperately hoping that the medium can be pushed forward and the dead weight can be left behind a little bit. It talks about the various tastes we go through in our lives - that feeling of being 16 and buying the grossest, most 'mature readers' titles on the stands in the hope of some gore and titties, or the fond childhood memories of half forgotten superheroes. The battle, both in ourselves and in society to marry up childish pursuits and interests with the expectations and growing responsibilities of adulthood. It's about the numinous power of imagination and all the jazz.

"I'm sure they have some symbolism or whatever excuse people come up for him this time" - yes because using literary devices other than "this man punched this man RILLY HARD" is bad and should be discouraged. There is definitely a trick to reading his stuff, it's called opening your mind and using your brain a bit.

 

[Veelk]

A couple of points - first, linking Morrison, weirdness and drugs is just really damn lazy and makes you sound either stupid or naive.

I liken Morrison and weirdness because he (or his comics) are really damn fucking weird. It's not even necessarily a criticism, just an observable aspect of his stuff. I don't see how anyone would disagree with that observation, even fans. Hell, lots of people like him because of the wierdness. As for drugs, considering drugs are a huge part of Flex Mentallo's story, I think I'm justified in referencing them here. Besides, Moore took plenty of drugs and had them in his stories as plot devices too, so I'm not saying the drugs are a bad thing either, just a notable motif. I don't care about drugs in a negative or positive light, but even other people here mention how the LSD influenced his writing.

It really does seem that the core themes of the book sailed right over your head. Personally I find them very affecting - the childish innocence of comic books juxtaposed next to the messy and imperfect lives we grow for ourselves as we get older being parallelled with the comics industry's faltering attempts to grow up along with its readership who are by turns either emotionally and intellectually stunted, or desperately hoping that the medium can be pushed forward and the dead weight can be left behind a little bit. It talks about the various tastes we go through in our lives - that feeling of being 16 and buying the grossest, most 'mature readers' titles on the stands in the hope of some gore and titties, or the fond childhood memories of half forgotten superheroes. The battle, both in ourselves and in society to marry up childish pursuits and interests with the expectations and growing responsibilities of adulthood. It's about the numinous power of imagination and all the jazz.

Part of it is just personal perspective. Morrison grew up with comics from the beginning. I only got into them recently and don't care for, say, the silver age's weirdness at all. I got that it was about the comic industry growing up, all the talk about the golden and silver ages were pretty explicit, but it didn't resonate with me at all. The concept means little to me except in a very abstract manner if I broaden it to all art, including literature, movies and shows. And the execution was, though I don't feel like going into the details of it, unsatisfactory due to how hard to follow the whole comic was. The most compelling piece was how imagination and ideas affect and shape us, but it's buried by junk I didn't care for. The optimism vs pessimism stuff was also an element that resonated with me I guess, but in a bad way since I don't like how obnoxious Morrison is about it. As for the other stuff...what am I suppose to say about themes that I am indifferent to, like the growth of the comic industry, except that I am indifferent to them? Why should I mention them at all?

"I'm sure they have some symbolism or whatever excuse people come up for him this time" - yes because using literary devices other than "this man punched this man RILLY HARD" is bad and should be discouraged. There is definitely a trick to reading his stuff, it's called opening your mind and using your brain a bit.

This would be a compelling argument if I suggested any such thing, but you go ahead and keep punching that strawman. You can even do it 'RILLY HARD' if you wish.

 

[Jedeye Sniv]

I liken Morrison and weirdness because he (or his comics) are really damn fucking weird. It's not even necessarily a criticism, just an observable aspect of his stuff. I don't see how anyone would disagree with that observation, even fans. Hell, lots of people like him because of the weirdness. As for drugs, considering drugs are a huge part of Flex Mentallo's story, I think I'm justified in referencing them here. Besides, Moore took plenty of drugs and had them in his stories as plot devices too, so I'm not saying the drugs are a bad thing either, just a notable motif.

Not weird. Imaginative. What is weird? Define weird. "something I don't understand right away" is not a good enough answer. With the exception of stuff like Doom Patrol I don't find him very weird at all. He's super imaginative and makes unusual links and fires ideas out quickly.

Again, I think even mentioning drug use as a negative is lazy and naive. He wrote the most obtuse and out there stuff he ever did while completely straight edge (Animal Man, Arkham, most of Doom Patrol). Using it makes you sound like some closed minded DARE person or something. Instead ask more interesting questions. Why is he using drugs in a story? Is it a crutch or is he saying something deeper? Is he simply trying to express his own experiences or is he encouraging/discouraging drug use?

Part of it is just personal perspective. Morrison grew up with comics from the beginning. I only got into them recently and don't care for, say, the silver age's weirdness at all. I got that it was about the comic industry growing up, all the talk about the golden and silver ages were pretty explicit, but it didn't resonate with me at all, neither the concept nor the execution. The most compelling piece was how imagination and ideas affect and shape us, but it's buried by junk I didn't care for.

OK, I guess I can't argue with a lack of interest in comics history, despite how awesome it is. Think of the Silver Age like this - grownups writing stories for young children during a time of immense and bewildering social change. Those comics and their themes of grotesque transformation and gender confusion hold some very interesting metaphorical insights into the psyche of the time, something that Flex tapped into incredibly well.

This would be a compelling argument if I suggested any such thing, but you go ahead and keep punching that strawman.

I literally quoted where you dismissed his use of symbolism and metaphor out of hand as an 'excuse' for his writing being weird. It made you sound super dumb.

 

[Veelk]

Not weird. Imaginative. What is weird? Define weird. "something I don't understand right away" is not a good enough answer. With the exception of stuff like Doom Patrol I don't find him very weird at all. He's super imaginative and makes unusual links and fires ideas out quickly.

So your defense is semantics. Wierd is wildly out of the ordinary for me, that's all. I don't consider that a virtue in and of itself. Imaginative is something that is unique, but well constructed. Morrison has unique ideas, but he doesn't bother explaining how they work, they just do.

Again, I think even mentioning drug use as a negative is lazy and naive. He wrote the most obtuse and out there stuff he ever did while completely straight edge (Animal Man, Arkham, most of Doom Patrol). Using it makes you sound like some closed minded DARE person or something. Instead ask more interesting questions. Why is he using drugs in a story? Is it a crutch or is he saying something deeper? Is he simply trying to express his own experiences or is he encouraging/discouraging drug use?

And I think it's lazy to not read my posts. I don't consider drugs an inherently bad or good thing and an author I like is also known for using them, both recreationally and as plot devices. For 2 posts now, you are arguing against a point I didn't make.

OK, I guess I can't argue with a lack of interest in comics history, despite how awesome it is. Think of the Silver Age like this - grownups writing stories for young children during a time of immense and bewildering social change. Those comics and their themes of grotesque transformation and gender confusion hold some very interesting metaphorical insights into the psyche of the time, something that Flex tapped into incredibly well.

And as you said, something utterly uncompelling to me. To me, the silver age is just randomness that holds no relevance where I stand. Even if I tried, I can't just make myself not baffled by how outrageous everything is just because someone somewhere felt the baffled by something social at some time period and that was somehow manifested into superman pulling planets in a chain to a new solar system. I'm a guy who, generally speaking, likes things to make sense.

I literally quoted where you dismissed his use of symbolism and metaphor out of hand as an 'excuse' for his writing being weird. It made you sound super dumb.

I don't care for overly symbolic stories, stories where the events have to be taken symbolically because there is no other way of making sense of them. Overuse of symbolism to cover up incoherent surface narrative is lazy to me because, abstracted enough, you can make symbolism of anything. Google "Ash is in a Coma" and Pokemon is suddenly an intricate psychological character piece. Feel free to disagree with that, but it's my personal preference and I think I'm allowed that without being accused of stupidity. And frankly, you're not exactly making me any more overly fond of Morrison or his fanbase by being as snide as you are. I make it a point that discussion and criticism be about the work itself, not the people, whether they like it or not. It makes for more amicable discussion and I recommend you take it up. Otherwise, it just causes antagonism. Even if I consider Morrison's work to be dumb, I would never say that about you or any fan for liking it, or even Morrison himself. It's just about the work. Pay me the same courtesy, please.

 

[Jedeye Sniv]

I read your posts just fine, and you are just as guilty of dismissing arguments in your replies and focusing on personal impressions of the author and not actually talking about the work which I am trying to do.

So your defense is semantics. Wierd is wildly out of the ordinary for me, that's all. I don't consider that a virtue in and of itself. Imaginative is something that is unique, but well constructed. Morrison has unique ideas, but he doesn't bother explaining how they work, they just do.

Such as? What was weird in the book? I concede that the book is fairly non-linear, but the ideas presented in the book are fairly straightforward and no weirder than most other super hero stuff when taken at face value. When you say "he doesn't bother explaining how they work, they just do" that's exactly how I feel about it, but in the positive. I don't need pages to explain a concept. I got it right away when he said it.

IMO Morrison/Quitely books read better when you go at them slowly. Take the words in, chew and digest them. Some of my favourite bits in any of his comics have been single panels where he just nails an idea and moves on. In a way it's kind of like comics-as-haiku - give the idea with as few words as possible, let the reader be engaged in a dialogue with it. This way you get a personal impression of the work and it stays with you. Compare to something like Promethea by Moore which is incredibly didactic and literal. I find a sketch with heart is more affecting than a photoreal rendering.

And I think it's lazy to not read my posts. I don't consider drugs an inherently bad or good thing and an author I like is also known for using them, both recreationally and as plot devices. For 2 posts now, you are arguing against a point I didn't make.

Fair enough, point dropped.

And as you said, something utterly uncompelling to me. To me, the silver age is just randomness that holds no relevance where I stand. Even if I tried, I can't just make myself not baffled by how outrageous everything is just because someone somewhere felt the baffled by something social at some time period and that was somehow manifested into superman pulling planets in a chain to a new solar system. I'm a guy who, generally speaking, likes things to make sense.

Not random - metaphor and interpretation. See, this is why it's so hard not to attack you. It's not like you understand it and disagree, it seems more like you don't get it and so dismiss out of hand, in which case it seems more as if you weren't prepared to engage with the work on it's own level. Which, since you've said you've never liked his work before (and Flex is widely touted as one of his most metaphysical works) leads me to wondering what you thought you would get out of it in the first place?

don't care for overly symbolic stories, stories where the events have to be taken symbolically because there is no other way of making sense of them. Overuse of symbolism to cover up incoherent surface narrative is lazy to me because, abstracted enough, you can make symbolism of anything. Google "Ash is in a Coma" and Pokemon is suddenly an intricate psychological character piece. Feel free to disagree with that, but it's my personal preference and I think I'm allowed that without being accused of stupidity.

I disagree because I think that he works on more than just a symbolic level. Not necessarily entirely literal either. I feel that his comics are often a collection of the most salient snapshots of the story. Characters often are not naturalistic so much as boiled down to their essence. But because of this he will frequently have the characters be incredibly human and vulnerable in a fashion that is both grand and symbolic but also very subtle and quiet, so much so that it's easy to miss these parts if you're reading and normal comics-pace.

And frankly, you're not exactly making me any more overly fond of Morrison or his fanbase by being as snide as you are. I make it a point that discussion and criticism be about the work itself, not the people, whether they like it or not. It makes for more amicable discussion and I recommend you take it up. Otherwise, it just causes antagonism. Even if I consider Morrison's work to be dumb, I would never say that about you or any fan for liking it, or even Morrison himself. It's just about the work. Pay me the same courtesy, please.

Ehhhhhh that's a big ask... decades of people decrying actual genius level work as weird and incomprehensible has a tendency to make a fanbase protective and defensive at times. I will try not to mock so readily in future however.

 

[Shin Johnpv]

speaking of comic creators shit-talking other comic book people, you read that amazingly long Alan Moore response? I think half of is just blasting on Grant Morrison in a hundred different ways.

Some of my favorites:

…”the herpes-like persistence of Grant Morrison himself”…”

“…Grant Morrison and his fellow mediocrities…”

“…by his own admission Grant Morrison had spent most of the Punk era in his room for fear of being spoken to roughly by some uncouth person with a pink Mohawk and a U.K. Subs t-shirt.”

“I’m afraid I didn’t see how appealing to completely unearned teen rebel credentials made any difference to the spoiled-child behaviour of a deeply unpleasant middle-aged man, and therefore once more declined the invitation to whisk him off to my Bat-cave so that we could solve mysteries together, perhaps in todger-revealing tights.”

Two thumbs up to Alan Moore.

 

[Shin Johnpv]

At least Claremont and Neal Adams just produced lower quality stuff, while maintaining sanity.
I wonde

Believe me when I tell you that Neal is far from maintaining sanity. Go ahead and Google Neal Adams Expanding Earth.

 

[Veelk]

I read your posts just fine, and you are just as guilty of dismissing arguments in your replies and focusing on personal impressions of the author and not actually talking about the work which I am trying to do.

My argument isn't that the author should not be considered at all when discussing the work, it's that there they're characters and intelligence and all other personal stuff is unrelated, so I'm not going to insult them over it. I fail to see how "I don't like it and this is why" is a dismissive argument.

Such as? What was weird in the book? I concede that the book is fairly non-linear, but the ideas presented in the book are fairly straightforward and no weirder than most other super hero stuff when taken at face value. When you say "he doesn't bother explaining how they work, they just do" that's exactly how I feel about it, but in the positive. I don't need pages to explain a concept. I got it right away when he said it.

The...basic premise? The main character is a man who can alter the fabric of reality by flexing his biceps is not unusually outlandish? Maybe I'm just sticking to more grounded comics. If so, I ought to continue doing that then I guess.

IMO Morrison/Quitely books read better when you go at them slowly. Take the words in, chew and digest them. Some of my favourite bits in any of his comics have been single panels where he just nails an idea and moves on. In a way it's kind of like comics-as-haiku - give the idea with as few words as possible, let the reader be engaged in a dialogue with it. This way you get a personal impression of the work and it stays with you. Compare to something like Promethea by Moore which is incredibly didactic and literal. I find a sketch with heart is more affecting than a photoreal rendering.

I disagree because I think that he works on more than just a symbolic level. Not necessarily entirely literal either. I feel that his comics are often a collection of the most salient snapshots of the story. Characters often are not naturalistic so much as boiled down to their essence. But because of this he will frequently have the characters be incredibly human and vulnerable in a fashion that is both grand and symbolic but also very subtle and quiet, so much so that it's easy to miss these parts if you're reading and normal comics-pace.

I combined those since they talk about similar things. I haven't read Promethea yet, but I should get on that. Anyway, I will give Morrison some credit in this, he can capture the essence of things succinctly and to some cases that is to his advantage. But more often than not, he simplifies them to the most basic, barebones versions of what is happening. Lex Luthor in ASS illustrates this best. Instead of pertaining to any philosophy or good argument for why Superman's presence is bad, Lex Luthor's opposition to him is essentially "Fuck that guy" for no reason than his personal pride. His insecurities are so blatant and obvious, it's cartoonish. On the other hand, Lex Luthor: Man of Steel went into some depth to elaborate on why he feels Superman is harmful to mankind without speaking like a raving lunatic, and his arguments are credible, while the evil things he does are rationalized well enough that you can actually believe that this is how a man who is ruled by pride would believably miss the signs of his hypocrisy. His entire character is an interesting thing to examine because you're not sure where he is genuine and when he is lying to himself. No, Morrison's Luthor is far, far from human. Their archtypes wearing flesh. Most of his characters are such...though I'll admit that Wallace Sage is his best go at it so far. He felt very vulnerable and human. But than again, he wasn't exactly succinct about it, was he? So I'll count that as a point in favor of elaboration. But ASS? No, those characters felt very artificial and simplistic.

Not random - metaphor and interpretation. See, this is why it's so hard not to attack you. It's not like you understand it and disagree, it seems more like you don't get it and so dismiss out of hand, in which case it seems more as if you weren't prepared to engage with the work on it's own level. Which, since you've said you've never liked his work before (and Flex is widely touted as one of his most metaphysical works) leads me to wondering what you thought you would get out of it in the first place?

Ehhhhhh that's a big ask... decades of people decrying actual genius level work as weird and incomprehensible has a tendency to make a fanbase protective and defensive at times. I will try not to mock so readily in future however.

Also combining because they're similar. I fail to see how I don't understand and disagree. I can see how the story is analogues to growing up with comics, as a fan and an industry. I acknowledge that. And I don't care for it, for reasons I already stated. This is not worth attacking anyone over. Even if you were right, it's still worth attacking anyone over. It's comics. You shouldn't mock people as a general rule. It's not polite and even if basic courtesy means nothing to you, it's detrimental to discussions. Insults are for people who are genuinely being harmful to others somehow, not literary preferences. I shouldn't have to take time to talk about basic manners in a thread on comic books.

As for Flex Mentallo, I can get behind concepts that I would generally not like if it resonates with me enough, and everything deserves a chance to do so I think. I don't imagine I'll be terribly impressed by his Batman run, but I'm not going to say it's shit until I finally do read it. Things can surprise me and there is atleast one work that I, by all my usual metrics of measuring quality, should absolutely hate, but not only do I love it, but I also thing is a great work of art. So yeah, things can surprise me so they deserve a chance. I wouldn't go into anything dead set on disliking it. Why would I? But I have memory and can spot writing habits. Morrison's name leads to certain expectations and, unfortunately, he usually abides by them.

 

[doniewhalberg]

Uhhhhhh, art on the new punisher book looks amazing.

 

[Jedeye Sniv]

The...basic premise? The main character is a man who can alter the fabric of reality by flexing his biceps is not unusually outlandish? Maybe I'm just sticking to more grounded comics. If so, I ought to continue doing that then I guess.

But it's just one step beyond the Charles Atlas stuff, a reference that anyone reading comics when it was published would have been able to pick up on. So, perhaps weird in isolation, but it makes sense in context. And it's a cool power. A man flying and shooting lasers out of his eyes is also outlandish. That's comics.

I combined those since they talk about similar things. I haven't read Promethea yet, but I should get on that. Anyway, I will give Morrison some credit in this, he can capture the essence of things succinctly and to some cases that is to his advantage. But more often than not, he simplifies them to the most basic, barebones versions of what is happening. Lex Luthor in ASS illustrates this best. Instead of pertaining to any philosophy or good argument for why Superman's presence is bad, Lex Luthor's opposition to him is essentially "Fuck that guy" for no reason than his personal pride. His indicators of his insecurities are so blatant and obvious, it's cartoonish. On the other hand, Lex Luthor: Man of Steel went into some depth to elaborate on why he feels Superman is harmful to mankind without speaking like a raving lunatic, and his arguments are credible, while the evil things he does are rationalized well enough that you can actually believe that this is how a man who is ruled by pride would believably miss the signs of his hypocrisy. His entire character is an interesting thing to examine because you're not sure where he is genuine and when he is lying to himself. No, Morrison's Luthor is far, far from human. Their archtypes wearing flesh. Most of his characters are such...though I'll admit that Wallace Sage is his best go at it so far. He felt very vulnerable and human. But than again, he wasn't exactly succinct about it, was he? He wouldn't shut up and got into his life quite a bit. So I'll count that as a point in favor of elaboration. But ASS? No, those characters felt very artificial and simplistic.

I generally enjoy the archetypical nature of his work tbh, it can bypass the window dressing that goes on pretending that most characters aren't just stock stereotypes which they usually are. Instead, they get to be grander even still. I disgree with your point about Luthor though and think that you were rather missing the point of ASS in general. It's a super silver agey book, and all of the characters in it are shorthand distillations of their essence. So therefore you get the most arrogant and arch Lex ever. His entire schtick is that he hates superman out of jealousy. If supes didn't exist, Lex would be the smartest guy in the world, he'd be a model of physical perfection (other than the hair, and the eyebrow bit in #5 is there to highligh his vanity, which is the core of the character). Lex is vain and jealous and pompous - what else does he need? I don't think 'cartoonish' is a bad thing at all. It has its place and is as valid as a gritty and literal take on the character and a writer/artist is able to do a lot more with a lot less as a result.

I'll give you a quick example - my favourite panel in ASS is clark sitting on the moon with Krypto. One panel, a third of a page, and the figures are tiny tiny, like less than a quarter of an inch tall. And that one panel says more about the wonder of being superboy (and a normal boy for that matter), the loneliness and the sense of adventure than a literal 4 issue mini series about the exact same thing. Flex is doing the same thing, the images aren't so much just moments in a story, they are entire stories in and of themselves, and you need patience and imagination to tease them out a little bit.

So yeah, if I can see all that in a panel and you can't, then these books obviously just aren't for you. But good news, there's only one Morrison and there's a whole lot of very literal, very grounded writers out there for you to sink your teeth into.

But damn, at least the guy's trying to say SOMETHING. Most comics I read are as disposable as toilet paper and are saying precisely fuck all about anything. Hence, annoyance when work that is saying something is summarily dismissed as weird.

 

[Veelk]

But it's just one step beyond the Charles Atlas stuff, a reference that anyone reading comics when it was published would have been able to pick up on. So, perhaps weird in isolation, but it makes sense in context. And it's a cool power. A man flying and shooting lasers out of his eyes is also outlandish. That's comics.

Again, only got into comics recently. Just because you're steeled against the insanity doesn't make it any less crazy. It just makes you resilient. As for superman and other comics, I feel they make more of an effort to try to ground things despite the insanity, and I appreciate that, though I would argue that laser beams is in a far lower tier of outlandish than warping gravity with your muscles.

I generally enjoy the archetypical nature of his work tbh, it can bypass the window dressing that goes on pretending that most characters aren't just stock stereotypes which they usually are. Instead, they get to be grander even still. I disgree with your point about Luthor though and think that you were rather missing the point of ASS in general. It's a super silver agey book, and all of the characters in it are shorthand distillations of their essence. So therefore you get the most arrogant and arch Lex ever. His entire schtick is that he hates superman out of jealousy. If supes didn't exist, Lex would be the smartest guy in the world, he'd be a model of physical perfection (other than the hair, and the eyebrow bit in #5 is there to highligh his vanity, which is the core of the character). Lex is vain and jealous and pompous - what else does he need? I don't think 'cartoonish' is a bad thing at all. It has its place and is as valid as a gritty and literal take on the character and a writer/artist is able to do a lot more with a lot less as a result.

So you agree that he is vain and superficial character fueled by irrational jealousy and pride. That's not me missing any point, it's just us having different tastes. We're seeing the same thing, you just like it and I detest it. I prefer more elaborate characterization than "He's just an insufferable asshole."

I'll give you a quick example - my favourite panel in ASS is clark sitting on the moon with Krypto. One panel, a third of a page, and the figures are tiny tiny, like less than a quarter of an inch tall. And that one panel says more about the wonder of being superboy (and a normal boy for that matter), the loneliness and the sense of adventure than a literal 4 issue mini series about the exact same thing. Flex is doing the same thing, the images aren't so much just moments in a story, they are entire stories in and of themselves, and you need patience and imagination to tease them out a little bit.

Which issue are you referring to? I doubt I'll share your sentiment, but I'd like to see what you're talking about.

So yeah, if I can see all that in a panel and you can't, then these books obviously just aren't for you. But good news, there's only one Morrison and there's a whole lot of very literal, very grounded writers out there for you to sink your teeth into.

But damn, at least the guy's trying to say SOMETHING. Most comics I read are as disposable as toilet paper and are saying precisely fuck all about anything. Hence, annoyance when work that is saying something is summarily dismissed as weird.

Eh. The point of being grounded is so you can build something atop of it. Most authors don't go about doing the dirty work or not enough of it anyway. But yes, I do appreciate that most writers atleast attempt it the non-morrison way. If Morrison is symbolism done right, I'd hate to see failures go at it.

As for Morrison, you can be weird and still say meaningful things. They aren't mutually exclusive and weird is not necessarily an insult, at least not when I say it. And I did say that Morrison adds good ideas to the batch, occasionally. Damien Wayne is a fantastic addition to the Bat family. A psychopathic side kick can provide an excellent dynamic to Bruce's problems and virtues. I just think the scale far outweights the bad than the good as far as his contributions go.

 

[KoruptData]

You guys couldn't sleep?

 

[Veelk]

You guys couldn't sleep?

Whats sleep?

 

[tim1138]

Is anyone other than myself (and I'm sure Harrier) reading the Forever Evil: Blight crossover? I was cautiously optimistic going into it since I'm a fan of JM DeMatteis (and the story is very clearly his baby), but it's an 18 part crossover covering four books so it could get messy. so far though I've really enjoyed the story and the fact it's just two writers collaborating has helped maintain a cohesive voice across the four books.

One of the more interesting themes in the story is one that has always interested me with regards to DC, the existence of the biblical God (with a capital g) the creator. I've always found it fascinating that the DC universe contains multiple parallel universes, gods old and New, mystical and magical beings, cosmic entities, and so on, yet it still maintains a very Judeo Christian concept of Heaven and Hell complete with God, angels and demons. You have this hodgepodge of ideas and concepts that shouldn't really be able to coexist, but it somehow works.

One of the more interesting changes in the N52 to me was making the Phantom Stranger

Spoiler

Judas Iscariot

. His specific mission of salvation juxtaposed against say Constantine's conniving makes for an interesting dynamic, especially against the backdrop of a world overrun by a very cartoony depiction of evil in the Crime Syndicate.

At this point I'm probably just rambling, but this has been a pretty interesting story so far, and in my opinion is worlds better than any of the other Forever Evil branded tie in books.

 

[KoruptData]

I just woke up and in my grogginess, I see walls of text and say too myself it's to early to read this, lol.

 

[KoruptData]

Is anyone other than myself (and I'm sure Harrier) reading the Forever Evil: Blight crossover? I was cautiously optimistic going into it since I'm a fan of JM DeMatteis (and the story is very clearly his baby), but it's an 18 part crossover covering four books so it could get messy. so far though I've really enjoyed the story and the fact it's just two writers collaborating has helped maintain a cohesive voice across the four books.

One of the more interesting themes in the story is one that has always interested me with regards to DC, the existence of the biblical God (with a capital g) the creator. I've always found it fascinating that the DC universe contains multiple parallel universes, gods old and New, mystical and magical beings, cosmic entities, and so on, yet it still maintains a very Judeo Christian concept of Heaven and Hell complete with God, angels and demons. You have this hodgepodge of ideas and concepts that shouldn't really be able to coexist, but it somehow works.

One of the more interesting changes in the N52 to me was making the Phantom Stranger

Spoiler

Judas Iscariot

. His specific mission of salvation juxtaposed against say Constantine's conniving makes for an interesting dynamic, especially against the backdrop of a world overrun by a very cartoony depiction of evil in the Crime Syndicate.

At this point I'm probably just rambling, but this has been a pretty interesting story so far, and in my opinion is worlds better than any of the other Forever Evil branded tie in books.

Oh Tim, I have been getting every book and I love it. I love it for the same reasons you gave and even commented on the last book in this thread how I found it cool they were going up to heaven to kick Gods teeth in, lol.

 

[tim1138]

Oh Tim, I have been getting every book and I love it. I love it for the same reasons you gave and even commented on the last book in this thread how I found it cool they were going up to heaven to kick Gods teeth in, lol.

Oh excellent, I knew you started it but couldn't remember if you were keeping up with it. I'm looking forward to your impressions on Constantine this week, good stuff happens.

 

[SpiderJerusalem]

yea I was going to wait for the Constantine and Stranger issues to drop to 2 bucks (I buy the physical Pandora and JLD) but I slipped and was catching up some over the weekend. I shouldn't have read JL Dark 24..it was good though.

 

[Jedeye Sniv]

Which issue are you referring to? I doubt I'll share your sentiment, but I'd like to see what you're talking about.

It's in issue 6. aka, the best issue

You guys couldn't sleep?

I'm English.

 

[Veelk]

It's in issue 6. aka, the best issue

I found it. Yeah, it's a nice image, but I don't think it tells a story in and of itself. Superboy can be feeling anything between wonder and "I'm hungry and wonder if its dinner time yet." Wonder exists within a character, not in his exterior. This could just as easily be routine for him. I can't speak to the 4 issue series you're referring to, but elaboration could be used to add to the idea, definitely. But again, we seem to have vastly different tastes in these things, so...

 

[KoruptData]

Oh excellent, I knew you started it but couldn't remember if you were keeping up with it. I'm looking forward to your impressions on Constantine this week, good stuff happens.

I'll read it first then. I like talking current comics with you guys.

 

[Jedeye Sniv]

I found it. Yeah, it's a nice image, but I don't think it tells a story in and of itself. Superboy can be feeling anything between wonder and "I'm hungry and wonder if its dinner time yet." Wonder exists within a character, not in his exterior. This could just as easily be routine for him. I can't speak to the 4 issue series you're referring to, but elaboration could be used to add to the idea, definitely. But again, we seem to have vastly different tastes in these things, so...

Yep, vastly incompatible.

I feel for you bro, I just want you to feel wonder too.

 

[Rafa=FedKilla]

I cant believe Dan fucking Jurjens is going to be writing Aquaman again and we don't have Peter David's run collected.

 

[Veelk]

Yep, vastly incompatible.

I feel for you bro, I just want you to feel wonder too.

Well, message Morrison to write better then

 

[SpiderJerusalem]

I cant believe Dan fucking Jurjens is going to be writing Aquaman again and we don't have Peter David's run collected.

It'll wake up the Garth kids that quit after Blackest Night.

Blah I want another mini like that Teen Titans Year One. That was so good.

 

[kmfdmpig]

Believe me when I tell you that Neal is far from maintaining sanity. Go ahead and Google Neal Adams Expanding Earth.

Now I worry for Claremont. Thanks for the heads up on Adams.

 

[Splatt]

I cant believe Dan fucking Jurjens is going to be writing Aquaman again and we don't have Peter David's run collected.

Wasn't Ostrander supposed to be writing that book?

What a downgrade...

 

[Rafa=FedKilla]

Greg Pak is on fire after leaving the clutches of Marvel. He is doing good things on Action Comics.

 

[tim1138]

Totally did not see

Spoiler

the Flash getting killed

coming in JL3K.

 

[Ephidel]

Totally did not see

Spoiler

the Flash getting killed

coming in JL3K.

I shouldn't have read this yet. That said,

Spoiler

I should have seen it coming. Guys who colour co-ordinate like him don't tend to do well in Giffen books

.

 

[tim1138]

I shouldn't have read this yet. That said,

Spoiler

I should have seen it coming. Guys who colour co-ordinate like him don't tend to do well in Giffen books

.

That's actually a very good point, just surprised it happened so quickly.

 

[crimsonspider89]

May Avengers Solicits are up.

Kang's Chronos Corps are here.

 

[ViewtifulJC]

All-Star Superman is tripe. Utter tripe.

Looking back, this really should have been the moment you realized Veelk's taste live in another galaxy from most of us, and you were just talking in an alien language, Jedeye

 

[Owzers]

Marvel trying to destroy my budget with 5.99 superior spidey issue and 5.99 Amazing spidey issue in the same month, both oversized though. But still!

 

[Ephidel]

That's actually a very good point, just surprised it happened so quickly.

Oh agreed, I wasn't expecting anything this soon.

 

[crimsonspider89]

Meant April. CBR worte the wrong ones on the title.

 

[GrandHarrier]

Tim,

don't know how I feel about the Blight crossover. The "Dark" line has always been my least favorite, I'm typically less fond of magic based characters, they too often break the "rules" of Superheroes in ways I don't like.

Add to this the fact that as someone who hasn't been following the Phantom Stranger, the host connection for Blight is completely lost on me.

 

[Filthy Slug]

Yep, vastly incompatible.

I feel for you bro, I just want you to feel wonder too.

I just wanted to say you're way more civil than I am when it comes to the ubiquitous Morrison argument, Jedeye, and thanks for giving me a hell of a great read with your posts.

 

[Jedeye Sniv]

Looking back, this really should have been the moment you realized Veelk's taste live in another galaxy from most of us, and you were just talking in an alien language, Jedeye

I just wanted to say you're way more civil than I am when it comes to the ubiquitous Morrison argument, Jedeye, and thanks for giving me a hell of a great read with your posts.

ta guys. I was really trying not to be too much of a dick. Like, 27% permissable dickishness

 

[KoruptData]

It's Scott Snyders birthday and Francesco drops this on Twitter. Super cool.

 

[Jedeye Sniv]

Ah man. Francavilla is THE SHIT. He needs to be on Bats full time. WTF with the Archie dude. He draws the best Bat-chin

 

[Rafa=FedKilla]

Im a week behind on my stories because of the winter weather. Black Widow was really great. I hope Noto can stay on this book, but who am I kidding? Marvel really needed this book.

 

[Shin Johnpv]

Is anyone other than myself (and I'm sure Harrier) reading the Forever Evil: Blight crossover? I was cautiously optimistic going into it since I'm a fan of JM DeMatteis (and the story is very clearly his baby), but it's an 18 part crossover covering four books so it could get messy. so far though I've really enjoyed the story and the fact it's just two writers collaborating has helped maintain a cohesive voice across the four books.

One of the more interesting themes in the story is one that has always interested me with regards to DC, the existence of the biblical God (with a capital g) the creator. I've always found it fascinating that the DC universe contains multiple parallel universes, gods old and New, mystical and magical beings, cosmic entities, and so on, yet it still maintains a very Judeo Christian concept of Heaven and Hell complete with God, angels and demons. You have this hodgepodge of ideas and concepts that shouldn't really be able to coexist, but it somehow works.

One of the more interesting changes in the N52 to me was making the Phantom Stranger

Spoiler

Judas Iscariot

. His specific mission of salvation juxtaposed against say Constantine's conniving makes for an interesting dynamic, especially against the backdrop of a world overrun by a very cartoony depiction of evil in the Crime Syndicate.

At this point I'm probably just rambling, but this has been a pretty interesting story so far, and in my opinion is worlds better than any of the other Forever Evil branded tie in books.

I've been reading it as well and would fully agree with everything you've written here. I probably share the same fears, is there going to be enough story there for 18 issues, which is a lot. So far I'd mostly yes, I think there's been a little padding here and there and I hope it doesn't go beyond that.

*Edit* I meant to writer more before I hit post. It is really interesting to me how tied to Judeo Christian ideas the overall DC Universe is. It makes sense in some ways with characters like The Spectre, and now in N52 Phantom Stranger. It makes me wonder slightly too, how that ties/connects with the multiverse and things like CoIE. Is the God of the DC Universe a being that exists continuously outside all of that? Or is it a being that's created in each Universe like the characters?

I don't think this is something DC's ever hinted to or commented on, but I could be wrong.

 

[GrandHarrier]

I'm not saying that Kyle is White Lantern Space Jesus, that he has seen the face of God beyond the source wall, but I'm saying he is Space Jesus and has seen the face of God beyond the source wall.

 

[tim1138]

I'm not saying that Kyle is White Lantern Space Jesus, that he has seen the face of God beyond the source wall, but I'm saying he is Space Jesus and has seen the face of God beyond the source wall.

I think it'd be more interesting if the Life Lantern went through the Source Wall and came back with the Anti Life Equation.

 

[Rafa=FedKilla]

The best new comic continues with a story you have to experience to believe! A really great solicitation that gets readers to buy it. I think Mornius usedit a few times.