|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on Nov 15, 2015 20:43:47 GMT -5
The only comic deserving of a 10 ... True, but only because Love & Rockets deserves an 11. Cei-U! I summon a big bowl of Heartbreak Soup! Yeah, I'd be okay with arguing that it's the best product of the assembly line factory system, but dudes like Chris Ware and Brian Chippendale are leagues above it in meticulously applied craft. (I LIKE Watchmen a lot more than Ware's overly sad-sacky "it is so hard to be a middle class white guy" material - IE 90% of it. But he's obviously doing the stuff that Watchmen does best better than Watchmen.) |
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on Nov 15, 2015 20:50:10 GMT -5
That's at least what the numbers from this poll, would indicate. It was an amalgam of factors: - 1984-1985, Secret Wars (confer mrp's exposition)
- 1985-1986, Crisis On Infinite Earths would reinforce the trend of big events in the genre.
- January 1986, Jean Grey comes back to life; the illusion of change just becomes an illusion.
- 1986, Miller shows how superhero comics should be.
- 1986-1987, Moore explains why.
- 1988, McFarlane starts his raise to power. Shortly after, image would trump (the house of) ideas.
In my opinion, Alan Moore's best superhero work was done between 1982 and 1984, in Captain Britain and in Warrior's Marvelman. Captain Britain? You are saying that Captain Britain was Alan Moore's BEST work. Best meaning "of higher quality" than his other work? So you are saying, using words, that Captain Britain was superior in some respects to "From Hell." Superior meaning better. As in Captain Britain was the better work. Than Watchmen. W-A-T-C-H-M-E-N. Better meaning "better?" Waiiiitt... is this some kind of UK Slang where "best" means "not as good as Watchmen I mean OBVIOUSLY, because Captain Britain was a fine work done in traditional Marvel style but nothing groundbreaking or even particularly memorable except that it was a precursor to Moore's later work after he found his own voice and stopped trying to write in the then-current Marvel style for financial reasons?" THAT makes sense, then. Carry on. Edit: For the record: 1. "This is Information" from the 9-11 tribute book. 2. Promethea before it got boring 3. V for Vendetta 4. Watchmen 5. From Hell |
|
|
|
Post by sitcomics on Nov 15, 2015 22:43:31 GMT -5
70s
60s (very close)
80s
50s
40s
Today
90s (though I enjoyed much of the late 90s)
00s
Fun poll
|
|
|
|
Post by tingramretro on Nov 16, 2015 2:16:24 GMT -5
In my opinion, Alan Moore's best superhero work was done between 1982 and 1984, in Captain Britain and in Warrior's Marvelman. Captain Britain? You are saying that Captain Britain was Alan Moore's BEST work. Best meaning "of higher quality" than his other work? So you are saying, using words, that Captain Britain was superior in some respects to "From Hell." Superior meaning better. As in Captain Britain was the better work. Than Watchmen. W-A-T-C-H-M-E-N. Better meaning "better?" Waiiiitt... is this some kind of UK Slang where "best" means "not as good as Watchmen I mean OBVIOUSLY, because Captain Britain was a fine work done in traditional Marvel style but nothing groundbreaking or even particularly memorable except that it was a precursor to Moore's later work after he found his own voice and stopped trying to write in the then-current Marvel style for financial reasons?" THAT makes sense, then. Carry on. Edit: For the record: 1. "This is Information" from the 9-11 tribute book. 2. Promethea before it got boring 3. V for Vendetta 4. Watchmen 5. From Hell If you read what I actually said, I specified "best superhero work, which would exclude V for Vendetta and From Hell. As for the rest of your list: yes, I do believe Captain Britain is better than Watchmen (which, while great, is overrated) and Promethea (which I never liked much). I don't even remember the other one. I would also strongly dispute that Captain Britain was written in the "then current Marvel style". I was reading a lot of Marvel at the time, and Moore's Captain Britain was unlike anything else they were producing. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2015 4:45:12 GMT -5
FWIW, I like Captain Britain and Marvelman/Miracleman better than Watchmen, and I think V for Vendetta is qualitatively better than Watchmen (which I also think is over-rated - not that it isn't a great/important work, but it's been lauded to an extent that it's become an automatic assumption of the best thing ever produced or that ever can be produced in the medium, and I just don't think it's actually at that level. Or that anything else is.)
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,865
|
Post by shaxper on Nov 16, 2015 5:27:08 GMT -5
I think V for Vendetta is qualitatively better than Watchmen Thoroughly agreed. |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,865
|
Post by shaxper on Nov 16, 2015 5:28:03 GMT -5
Well, the results are in and, as much as I agree with them, I am honestly shocked that the '70s overtook the '60s that easily. I truly thought there was more love than that for Marvel's Silver Age.
I'm also really surprised we didn't see a single vote for the 1940s nor the 1990s, and yet we did get one for the 1950s (I did not see that coming).
|
|
|
|
Post by tingramretro on Nov 16, 2015 7:09:02 GMT -5
FWIW, I like Captain Britain and Marvelman/Miracleman better than Watchmen, and I think V for Vendetta is qualitatively better than Watchmen (which I also think is over-rated - not that it isn't a great/important work, but it's been lauded to an extent that it's become an automatic assumption of the best thing ever produced or that ever can be produced in the medium, and I just don't think it's actually at that level. Or that anything else is.) Agreed on all points. |
|
|
|
Post by tingramretro on Nov 16, 2015 7:11:41 GMT -5
Well, the results are in and, as much as I agree with them, I am honestly shocked that the '70s overtook the '60s that easily. I truly thought there was more love than that for Marvel's Silver Age. I'm also really surprised we didn't see a single vote for the 1940s nor the 1990s, and yet we did get one for the 1950s (I did not see that coming). I'm actually surprised that the 70s came so far ahead of the 80s. I ove a lot of 70s comics, but I really think the early 80s were much more significant in terms of the evolution of comics and the quality of the work being produced. |
|
|
|
Post by Cei-U! on Nov 16, 2015 9:16:14 GMT -5
Thanks to my ongoing research, I've probably read more 1940s Marvels than anyone else here at CCF and I can tell you 85-90% of it simply doesn't hold up. Dell, DC and Fawcett's titles of the era are far more readable overall. Only the work of Bill Everett and of Simon & Kirby stands the test of time (in my opinion, natch).
Cei-U!
I summon the vote of no confidence!
|
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on Nov 16, 2015 16:14:54 GMT -5
Well, the results are in and, as much as I agree with them, I am honestly shocked that the '70s overtook the '60s that easily. I truly thought there was more love than that for Marvel's Silver Age. I'm also really surprised we didn't see a single vote for the 1940s nor the 1990s, and yet we did get one for the 1950s (I did not see that coming). I'm actually surprised that the 70s came so far ahead of the 80s. I ove a lot of 70s comics, but I really think the early 80s were much more significant in terms of the evolution of comics and the quality of the work being produced. Even admitting that the end of the 80's was already bad (the 90's infection), I gave it my vote. Others might've felt, like that dive warranted the vote going somewhere else. |
|
|
|
Post by Phil Maurice on Nov 16, 2015 17:11:39 GMT -5
Thanks to my ongoing research, I've probably read more 1940s Marvels than anyone else here at CCF and I can tell you 85-90% of it simply doesn't hold up. Dell, DC and Fawcett's titles of the era are far more readable overall. Only the work of Bill Everett and of Simon & Kirby stands the test of time (in my opinion, natch). Cei-U! I summon the vote of no confidence! Though I haven't read nearly as many as you, Kurt, a sampling of the various publishers you mentioned which I have read leads me to the same conclusion. In the case of Timely/Marvel, the interiors are often made to look even more laughably sub-standard by the incredible Alex Schomburg covers.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2015 19:01:29 GMT -5
I don't think I've ever read a 1940s Marvel comic...  |
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on Nov 16, 2015 19:19:35 GMT -5
Captain Britain? You are saying that Captain Britain was Alan Moore's BEST work. Best meaning "of higher quality" than his other work? So you are saying, using words, that Captain Britain was superior in some respects to "From Hell." Superior meaning better. As in Captain Britain was the better work. Than Watchmen. W-A-T-C-H-M-E-N. Better meaning "better?" Waiiiitt... is this some kind of UK Slang where "best" means "not as good as Watchmen I mean OBVIOUSLY, because Captain Britain was a fine work done in traditional Marvel style but nothing groundbreaking or even particularly memorable except that it was a precursor to Moore's later work after he found his own voice and stopped trying to write in the then-current Marvel style for financial reasons?" THAT makes sense, then. Carry on. Edit: For the record: 1. "This is Information" from the 9-11 tribute book. 2. Promethea before it got boring 3. V for Vendetta 4. Watchmen 5. From Hell If you read what I actually said, I specified "best superhero work, which would exclude V for Vendetta and From Hell. As for the rest of your list: yes, I do believe Captain Britain is better than Watchmen (which, while great, is overrated) and Promethea (which I never liked much). I don't even remember the other one. I would also strongly dispute that Captain Britain was written in the "then current Marvel style". I was reading a lot of Marvel at the time, and Moore's Captain Britain was unlike anything else they were producing. Oh. I missed that. Although I'd call "V" as a superhero book. Extremely skilled dude in a costume fights evil; Close enough, to my mind. Still don't get the Captain Britain appreciation. I'd call it a "C" on the Alan Moore scale. It reads A LOT like Chris Claremont to me - who would be the cutting edge of Marvel style, I guess. Marvelman I just read for the first time, and that (A) was everything I hate in superhero comics, but (B) was obviously a significant and major development in terms of what you can do with superheros. Captain Britain felt like a step back from what Gerber,Englehart, and Starlin were doing in the '70s... or at least less layered in terms of content and theme. |
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on Nov 16, 2015 19:25:08 GMT -5
Thanks to my ongoing research, I've probably read more 1940s Marvels than anyone else here at CCF and I can tell you 85-90% of it simply doesn't hold up. Dell, DC and Fawcett's titles of the era are far more readable overall. Only the work of Bill Everett and of Simon & Kirby stands the test of time (in my opinion, natch). Cei-U! I summon the vote of no confidence! Man, I love so much of that stuff. You had Fletche Hanks, Basil Wolverton, Mike Sekowsky, the original Black Widow, the Destroyer, the Whizzer, Electro and Flexo, the freaking Fighting Hobo. I don't think I've ever read a BAD Golden Age Captain America story through the end of the war. I agree that the Fawcett and DC works were more professionally produced, but there's something about GA Marvel that screams WHOO! COMICS! at me the way the more thought out and labored over works from other companies don't. |
|
