|
Post by Ozymandias on Dec 14, 2023 1:02:44 GMT -5
You aren't talking evolution, but the accumulation of scenery, props, anecdotes... In the question itself, there was already a reason. The question pre-supposes your answer. My answer is no. I don't see any reason that the evolution of SF in literature or movies means you can't look at its evolution in comics. It's like saying you can't look at literary noir because that term was first applied to films noir. Or vice-versa because the films absolutely came out (by and large) of adaptations of the literature. I didn't say you can't, I said there's not much sense in searching for something where it's not. Of course you can, and you'd be losing your time.
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Dec 14, 2023 3:18:19 GMT -5
I agree with the thought that when people say things like, "the 1990s were a bad decade for comics" they're almost always talking about Marvel/DC superhero comics. For me personally, the 1990s were a great decade for comics - Love and Rockets and its spin-offs, Eightball, Dirty Plotte, Xenozoic Tales, Hate ... some of my best comics-reading memories come from that decade. And that's leaving out Moore's From Hell and all the Vertigo stuff that I didn't read until the early 2000s but that for most fans would be part of their '90s reading experience. So the 1990s were definitely a classic comics era for me, one of several.
I have no idea what tag is put on it though. And "Bronze Age" and all that terminology does seemed tied to Marvel/DC and the other mainstream (as in not underground, not independent) US publishers, Charleton and the like.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2023 4:06:23 GMT -5
The idea that Bone and its incredible success in alternate venues than the comic shop ghetto or the rise of things like Dog Man, Diary of a Wimpy Kid or Raina Telgemeier's books haven't been a sea change is silly. And that leaves completely aside the rise of Manga (they're still funnybooks, guys). If Bone is not a "classic" at this point by any definition, then I really don't know what to say. The 90's Batman Adventures series is probably my favorite Bat title since the Silver Age as well (there, I said it).
|
|
|
Post by Cei-U! on Dec 14, 2023 5:14:47 GMT -5
The 90's Batman Adventures series is probably my favorite Bat title since the Silver Age as well (there, I said it). It might well be my favorite version of Batman ever.
Cei-U! I summon the blasphemy!
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Dec 14, 2023 10:07:37 GMT -5
The 90's Batman Adventures series is probably my favorite Bat title since the Silver Age as well (there, I said it). It might well be my favorite version of Batman ever.
Cei-U! I summon the blasphemy!
I actually told my youngest son a few nights ago that I'm rapidly coming to the conclusion that Batman: The Animated Series is my favorite iteration of the character ever.
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Dec 14, 2023 10:08:48 GMT -5
You aren't talking evolution, but the accumulation of scenery, props, anecdotes... The question pre-supposes your answer. My answer is no. I don't see any reason that the evolution of SF in literature or movies means you can't look at its evolution in comics. It's like saying you can't look at literary noir because that term was first applied to films noir. Or vice-versa because the films absolutely came out (by and large) of adaptations of the literature. I didn't say you can't, I said there's not much sense in searching for something where it's not. Of course you can, and you'd be losing your time. You're saying that there has been no evolution of either SF or westerns in comics over time. Well alrighty then...
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on Dec 14, 2023 10:33:05 GMT -5
No, I'm saying that's not where the evolution's trace would lead you to.
|
|
|
Post by adamwarlock2099 on Dec 14, 2023 11:16:46 GMT -5
I agree with the thought that when people say things like, "the 1990s were a bad decade for comics" they're almost always talking about Marvel/DC superhero comics. For me personally, the 1990s were a great decade for comics - Love and Rockets and its spin-offs, Eightball, Dirty Plotte, Xenozoic Tales, Hate ... some of my best comics-reading memories come from that decade. And that's leaving out Moore's From Hell and all the Vertigo stuff that I didn't read until the early 2000s but that for most fans would be part of their '90s reading experience. So the 1990s were definitely a classic comics era for me, one of several. I have no idea what tag is put on it though. And "Bronze Age" and all that terminology does seemed tied to Marvel/DC and the other mainstream (as in not underground, not independent) US publishers, Charleton and the like. I personally think that the tag of "age" is put on superhero comics mostly because independent comic titles have/had a beginning and an end. Xenozoic Tales, Bone, Sandman, Cerebus (and probably a lot of underground titles that I am unaware of) all ended at some point. Maybe some of these franchises like Sandman had one-shots and maybe a mini-series like Shade attached to Starman, but in the end they for the most part ended. Whereas 50-70 year old superheroes are just rehashed year after year by a plethora of different writers and artists. 'I like Batman' can mean 'I like Bill Finger Batman.' Or 'I like Batman Adventures' So tagging them with a specific "age" for the sake of conversation and mutual understanding seems pointed. If I mention Cerebus it doesn't matter to the person I am talking to what "age", if not in multiple "ages" it was written in because they have either heard of Cerebus or not. When it was written is pretty irrelevant.
|
|