I recently finished The Brood Saga. I found it pretty awful and contrived. Paul Smith is an interesting artist, but I don't think I want to read anymore Claremont UXM. How do guys feel about the Brood Saga and what came after?I've seen people on here say that post-Brood Saga Uncanny X-Men is the best of Claremont's tenure, but it feels like I'm being led on.I may just skip to New Mutants and eventually Excalibur and hope those are good, at least. I know the art is.
>>145462672Being a contrarian doesn't make you interesting.
>>145462672that run is a blasti think you might just have bad taste
>>145462672>How do guysHow do YOU guys
>>145462672What DO you like?
>>145463740>>145464218WHY do you WRITE like THIS?
>>145464218As far as X-Men goes, I like Moore's Captain Britain and Claremont and Miller's Wolverine mini, both of which I read some time ago. I liked the brief Thomas/Adams X-Men run for the art.
>>145462672I found it a little long, but otherwise a solid read.You're probably not used to the X-Men having cosmic adventures. These stories were written when Star Wars was the biggest franchise in the world, cosmic adventures were happening in many strange places.
>>145464542Because normal people can understand that's for emphasis
>>145464946That's not really the issue. I recognize that it borrows from Star Trek, Star Wars, Doctor Who, Alien, and other sources, but I'm fine with that. The problem for me is the execution. Other than the format of reiterating the powers and personalities of each character in basically every issue, which is a constant nuisance, it's a combination of things like deus ex machinas (Binary, Storm and the space whale), characters withholding vital information until the "right" moment (Wolverine), that repetitive, horseshit inner turmoil about killing (Storm, Cyclops, Kitty), and when and where the writer decides for characters to be incapacitated really help bring it down. I feel like every arc in Claremont's X-Men has been a combination of dumb things like this.
Okay.
>>145462672What are the Brood up to these days? Are they more of Carol's villains now?
>>145468584No idea.
>>145462672I’ve seen you talking about Claremont’s run. You can stop shitposting to feel special. Most of this board wasn’t old enough to read it to feel nostalgia for it.
>>145469014Did you rike it?
>>145465677Keep reading. A lot of that morality shit is going to get thrown out in the next few issues. Storm first (just look at the cover for 170), then a little bit later, Kitty (it’s when she picks the name Shadowcat)
>>145462672Is the perfect jumping off point for X-Men right before New X-Men by Morrison and Quitely? I mean maybe if it was good I could stomach Quitely's art but from everything I hear about Genosha, Xorn, and all the dumb morality that goes on it seems like it's perfect to jump off. I mean I know there's probably some good side series like Astonishing X-force, stuff that has X-23 before she gets turned into a boring character, and other post 2000's X-Men spin-offs that might be good. But mainline would you say what I described is accurate?
>>145470985New X-Men is awesome, you're missing out. Literally the only X comics Morrison knew were the classic Claremont run but he was smart enough to not dick ride them because that's all X-Men was for decades. If anything the best jumping off point in after New X-Men.
>>145471242>Morrison>awesomeOpinion discarded.
>>145469840170 looks interesting enough. I guess I'll keep going for a bit, or maybe start skipping around.>>145470985As far as I've read, through issue 166 of UXM, I couldn't even tell you a good jumping on point, unless you absolutely care about the characters and their history. None of it's been satisfactory for me, though I seem to be in the minority.
>>145471242The biggest mistake is the thin visor.
>>145471652wdym?
The Brood were kinda meh but From the Ashes that follows is Peak X-Men.
>>145470985>Is the perfect jumping off point for X-Men right before New X-Men by Morrison and Quitely?If you somehow managed to read all the way through the late 90s, and even through Claremont's return in 2000, then yes, treat the Magneto storyline just before Morrison and Casey as the final X-Men story, pretend they stopped making X-Men comics in 2001, quit and never look back. But you should probably have stopped long before then.
I can't get into Claremont's X-Men at all. It's so verbose, boring, and bland. I'm on issue #97 of Uncanny X-Men and I want to blow my brains out from the sheer boredom. So far it's all Slice of Life events with a forgettable villain of the week. I can't even enjoy the fight scenes because they go by so quick and the art is meh. And I can't enjoy the dialogue because it's so verbose and lacking in charm. And the characters are all really lame too.I'm not even baiting here. I really don't understand the acclaim for Claremont.
>>145462672I want to read X-Men but I know nothing about them. Seems intimidating. Should I just get a Marvel Unlimited subscription and start with Claremont?
>>145472848Reads fine to me.
>>145462672>I've seen people on here say that post-Brood Saga Uncanny X-Men is the best of Claremont's tenure, but it feels like I'm being led on.its me!tastes differ I guess. sounds like you gave it an honest try and it just didn't connect with you. that's fine. Enjoy Sienkiewicz New Mutants, good luck with Excalibur bc it's Claremont indulging himself and fucking around
>>145472848That’s just your own impatience
>>145473008>That’s just your own impatienceNo? I like normal books. Claremont's style is just really boring to me. The pic I attached wasn't meant to showcase the verbosity of the dialogue, but rather the blandness of the villains I've been introduced so far. Pic related would be an example of how wordy and boring the "action" scenes are for example. I don't mind lots of prose, if the prose itself is interesting. But they're not saying anything of substance here. It's just words words words. It reminds me of those Chinese webnovel authors who get paid by the fucking word.
>>145473169And here's proof that I don't mind wordy comics. Pic related is Superman Secret Identity. Most of the pages in this comic are wordy, but I don't mind, because the prose is engrossing, and I'm engaged in the story.
>>145472848>It's so verboseTake your Ritalin, zoomer.
>>145473169That's a standard bronze age comic. Silver and golden age comics are even wordier.
>>145473352>Take your Ritalin, zoomer.Again, I have no problem with wordy comics if the subject matter itself is interesting. So far Claremont's books have yet to impress me. The characters don't stand out, the action is horrendous, and the prose is bland. Pic related is from Green Lantern Rebirth, a fairly wordy comic, that I enjoyed.>>145473432Maybe Bronze age comics just aren't for me then.
>>145473497Yeah if your first exposure to comics was the decompressed kind from the post-00s you're going to have a rough time with most older stuff.
>>145473497>I have no problem with wordy comicsIf that was true, you wouldn't have listed "verbose" as your top complaint (or used the word at all), yet it's the first complaint that came into your head.
>>145472647Morrison is a cringe troon and most of the problems with the x-brand started there
>>145472848>and the art is mehincorrect
>>145472848Oh yeah, the first 30 or so issues are dogshit. I'm on 167 and I still don't really like any of the characters.
>>145474613Zoomer take
>>145473701The problems started with Lee and Kirby.
>>145462672It's not for everyone, especially when it's such a blatant pastiche of Alien. You'll probably appreciate the return to form after the arc.
>>145472981I've given it 73 issues to grab me.>good luck with Excalibur bc it's Claremont indulging himself and fucking aroundI hope it's fun, at least. It really helps that he's working with Alan Davis.>>145475391I get that, but given how it's touted as one of the absolute greatest comics of all time, I should at least understand where the people that rated it so highly are coming from, but I still don't. It's especially these arcs, from Proteus to the Brood Saga.
>>145474044I have to agree. Cockrum kind of blows.
>>145472647We dont accept this faggot or any of his shitty stories here.New X-Men is where mutants.l became cringe and quality dropped
>>145471242>New X-Men is awesome, you're missing outBUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHANo.
>>145473701>>145476744I'm reading his Doom Patrol run, and while it's not that good either, it's more enjoyable than Claremont's X-Men.
>>145472687I hope you're right.
>>145475317this
>>145476542Explain your reasoning.
>>145477679His art is relatively plain compared to that of Byrne and Smith. I guess his strong suit was costume design and making women pretty, but that's about it. His pages didn't exactly pop.
>>145462672if you don't like Claremont then you fundamentally hate comic books
>>145462672if you like Claremont then you fundamentally hate comic books
>>145470985I only want to read it for the Quitely art.
>>145477041ah yeah, thank you for reminding me that he broke doom patrol and made them unusable forever
>>145477845try Futurians. it will probably not change your mind, but you should try it. Cockrum was a master designer, only Kirby was better
>>145478021>I only want to read it for the Quitely art.
>>145478046>Cockrum was a master designer, only Kirby was betterAs far as costumes, I'd say only Ditko was better.
>>145472848>that>"verbose"
>>145472848Do you read any books without pictures?
>>145479688nah. And Spider-Man is an exception to the rule. But then again, Cockrum designed Colossus, Storm, Nightcrawler, and others
>>145479688>>145480940Kirby and Ditko were both better designers than Cockrum.
>>145481639Cockrum knew what teenage boys liked.
>>145478229Correct.
>>145481886Meh.
>>145475391>blatant pastiche of AlienYou're thinking of Kitty's first solo story. The Brood themelves are obviously derived from xenomorphs, but the Brood Saga story has more in common with the plot of Invasion of the Body Snatchers.
>>145477871>>145477910Which is it!?
>>145478039Doom Patrol had its run in the Silver Age. Kupperberg would have killed it forever if it weren't for Morrison.
>>145462748Being a conformist doesn't make you interesting.
>>145484009No one pretends it does, retard.
>>145462672This is about when I dropped it 8 or 9 years ago and I never looked back since.
>>145472848There's a reason only smelly nerds read those and not normal people.
>>145462748If someone wanted to be interesting, they'd stay far the fuck away from comic books.
>>145484581Only slack-jawed faggots like or care about X-Men.
>>145484192>one of the most acclaimed comic runs of all time>endlessly mined in cartoon and live action adaptations>"only smelly nerds"
>>145484801Yes, only smelly nerds read comic books in the 80s.
>>145484801Normies watched the adaptations, smelly nerds read the comics and watched the adaptations.
Bullshit.
>>145471941Yeah stick with it.The X-Men is about to get it's second wind.Then just as it is about to slow down, issue #200 happens, and things quickly change, and the series gets it's third wind.
>>145470985Definitely skip it, I'd say give the Messiah Trilogy a shot (there's probably enough of a recap on it), Second Coming is a good finale.I'd go further and say read Necrosha, too, though that might need a bit of context. But it does tie back into the Claremont era.
>>145481886I love how Jean looks perfectly like a He-Man character there.
>>145486420I will, but I'm still waiting for the first one.
>>145486905Yeah. She looks like shit.
>>145480920see >>145473169
>>145487607If you didn't like the Byrne issues then you're just not going to like any of it.
>>145473311Pardon me while I ignore the writing and ask: Is that a professional comic? That someone sold? For money?Looks like it's 100 percent sourced from stock photos with basic bitch filters over them.
>>145489041It's for effect. It's a semi-real world with no superheroes or supervillains in it. Just Superman. This was the same artist that drew Nextwave.I kind of agree woth you, though. My favorite practitioner of this style was John Paul Leon, who did the Batman equivalent of this Superman comic.
>>145488635You might be right. The best of what I've read so far is Days of Future Past, which is only really good for the future sequences.
>>145485927?
>>145482558They did it again in this arc with Kitty and the Shi'ar ship airlock.
>>145473701>>145476744>>145478039A writer is bad because he writes bad, not because he "ruins" characters.
>>145492149retard
>>145492223no u
>>145462672X-Men just sucks, bro.
>>145492149My take on New X-Men is that he spent too much time doing passive aggressive takes on ideas he wanted X-Men to stop doing and not nearly enough time exploring new ideas. Of course hie status quo didn't last long after he left, he didn't even provide a strong alternative.
>>145493487That does sound pretty lame.
>>145462672I don't read comics that old. They are fairly awful.
>>145493749You never read Miller's Daredevil?
>>145492149>not because he "ruins" charactersA characteristic of bad writing.
>>145494070To be honest, I grew up in a dark place as a kid and watched a TON of horror and violent shit. The violence of Millers Daredevil would not appeal to me leaving only prose and art. And a lot of times, the prose of the old comics leaves a lto to be desired and the art does not rise above being charming much of the time. I never really tried to look into it because I knew the story, the violence isn't going to titilate, and I was worried about ruining how I felt about a character that I was already iffy on by reading it. But I guess I can bite the bullet and try it out.
>>145470985Best jump off point would be Xcutioner's Song. >>New Mutants/X-Men have reconciled>>Scott being a horrible dad arc culminates in his son by Maddie coming back as a super villain who dies trying to kill his dad >>Apocalypse and Cable dead>>Archangel gets closure on Apocalypse>>Xavier survives and fully unites his children save for those fucks in Excalibur>>Lobdell explicitly has Xavier state that gays are not anything like mutants and explicitly leaves them out on his big speech on tolerance
>>145494687I would maybe say drop off after Fatal Attractions and wedding of Jean and Scott (that's what they did in Poland in the 90s as a farewell issue).
>>145494850Not that anon but what, they stopped publishing it after that?Honestly the marriage is a good happy ending.
>>145494920Yeah, the sales were going down around 1997. Aftee that the next mutant comics we had yeaars later was Ultimate X-Men and New X-Men...a huge tone shift.
>>145472848>too many words! me no smart enuff!Ok zoomer. If the funny pages are too verbose for you I'd hate to see how you handle actual literature. Stick to 'See Spot Run' I guess.
>>145472848It's hilarious how everyone is piling on you about verbosity.
>>145494423Not the way /co/ goes about it.
>>145495778So you think that's "smart", huh? All right, you've made your case, this is what passes for smart in your book.
>>145495656That's around the time it lost all quality.Funny, if a reboot ever happened, that's be the point where to start imo.
>>145496895If you liked it up until that point then you have no business to talk about quality.
>>145472848Claremont doesn't really get going on the kind of long-form storytelling he'd be known for until issue 100. He never really loses the faux-operatic descriptors or dialog, which depending in your taste is either essential to elevating the drama or supremely tedious.Heretical as it might be to suggest, I'd maybe read one of the later, more well regarded stories like Future Past, Demon Bear, or the Wolverine collaboration with Miller. If those aren't doing anything for you Claremont is just probably not your guy.
>>145497042>the faux-operatic descriptors or dialog, which depending in your taste is either essential to elevating the drama or supremely tedious.I think it's tedious because he's not great at it.
>>145496827>So you think that's "smart", huh?No, it's just smarter than you are, retard.
>>145497251You said "actual literature". You are so insecure you immediately went to insults like a child. It shouldn't surprise me since you consider this trash "literature"
>>145497477>YouMultiple people have pegged you for a retard, retard.
>>145497505The whole world has pegged you for a retard, retard.
>>145497562t. retard
>>145497566Keep crying, monkey.
>>145497580Keep sharting yourself where everyone can see it, retard.
>>145497612Nah that's you.
>>145497637>retards can't create, only imitateOK, retard.
>>145497644You seem like a bot. Are you a bot? Reply if you're a bot.
>>145473311A good example of the boring middlebrow shit that has killed the superhero comics industry. Fuck that. Give me Bronze Age craziness any day over this.
>>145497669You seem like a retard. Reply if you're a retard.
>>145495656Wow, they jumped straight to New Coke. Yuck.>>145496780It is, though.
>>145498254Yeah.But were slowly getting more and more older studf in tob and hc, including big chunks if Claremont's run. Few months ago we finally got the whole X-tinction Agenda arc, when in 1994 we got it butchered down to...3 issues (we had monthly 52 pages including 2 issues each, so they slapped all the Jim Lee art ones and added X-Men 2099 #1 to fill it out.
>>145489760You might like the Outback era, after 'Fall of the Mutants'but yeah, if you didn't like the Byrne era, it's unlikely you like anything else under Claremont, and might as well skip to the Jim Lee era.
>>145498723>skip to the Jim Lee era.Anon, OP has terrible taste, but there's no need to punish him for it.
wrong
>>145462672This is why comics will never be popular.
>>145500345What do you mean?
>>145498723Paul Smith is looking pretty good right now.I'm not a fan of Jim Lee. I did read one issue from the Claremont/Lee era and it wasn't very good either, though Claremont seem more refined than he does where I'm currently at.>>145498751If I had terrible taste, I'd likely be enjoying myself with this run.
>>145500602Garbage is being touted as the peak of the medium, people get turned off early on because they try the supposed best and get crap.
>>145501190You're thinking of the Eisner winners, not this.
>>145501219Both this and modern Eisner winners are crap.
>>145470985Inferno is the jumping off point
>>145468584Some years ago, a King's Egg, a bioweapon created by the ancient Kree in order to control the Brood, appeared and was brought to Earth. All the Brood converged on Earth to fight over it, but Broo (the mutant Brood that hangs out with the X-Men) ate it and became the King of the Brood.He kept the Brood in line from that point, preventing them from causing any damage. But recently, Nightmare started messing with the dreams of the Brood and caused them to go feral for a while. The X-Men teamed up with Carol and some of her friends to stop them, and Broo got them under control again.Then he used them against ORCHIS during the Krakoa vs ORCHIS war, and that's the last we've seen of them, to my knowledge. Presumably they're still hanging out harmlessly under Broo's reign.
>>145498254No, though.People here go around saying Moore ruined Swamp Thing and The Joker when he made them better than ever.
>>145501219People getting into a new medium don't cared about some obscure awards thing.
>>145501881lmao
>>145501458>keeping the Brood on EarthModern X-Men is retarded on every level.
>>145502117They weren't on Earth. I forgot to mention it, so it's on me, but when they realized the Brood were converging on Earth because of the Egg, they took it off-Earth and I think into an uninhabited place in Shi'ar space. After Groo ate it and became King, he stayed there with his Brood army.
>>145500971>If I had terrible taste>IfReminder that this filthy casual rates Geoff Johns and Kurt Busiek >>145473311 >>145473497
>>145502456Oh less bad, let the Shi'Ar deal with that shit, fuck those alien birds. Are they still part of the Kree empire?
>>145502550Pump your brakes, kid, since when do we hate good ol' Busiek?
>>145502891Since when don't we hate him?
>>145501458>new and mysterious threat rumored to originate from outside the galaxy>now They Were Here All Along and dick-assing around with the KreeWhy even have continuity at this point? It's not like anyone cares anymore.I don't think they ever did explain how they were suddenly able to start shifting back and forth between forms like bargain bin Skrulls. And it would've been so easy to do.
>>145502911Since forever.
>>145502581No, not sure when but the Shi'ar haven't been under the Kree for a while.To the best of my understanding, the current Space powers are the Kree-Skrull Empire (led by Hulkling), the Shi'ar Empire (led by Xandra, genetic daughter of Xavier and Lilandra), Spartax (which have been expanding recently somewhat), The Intergalactic Empire of Wakanda (some stupid shit with some Wakandans time traveling and then forming a previously unheard of space empire), and then there's a whole new expanse of space called "The Borderlands" after Uatu removed a barrier that had been placed between it and known space early in the Universe's history.For a while, the Sol system was very important because Krakoa started exporting a miracle metal to the galaxy, and reformed Mars into Planet Arakko, which acts as the Capital of the Sol system. When Krakoa fell, the metal exports stopped, but Arakko is still there.There were also an invasion by the Cotati, an invasion by the Prosilicans, an invasion by the Cancerverse, an invasion by Knull, and possibly others I may have missed. All of them were stopped. There was an incident in the Borderlands in which Groot grew out of control and started growing interplanetary and engulfing planets (the Grootfall), but it turned out it was somehow a benevolent act and it seeded those planets with life.>>145502960In the story where they introduce the King Egg, they show the ancient Kree found some specimens of the Brood in the far reaches of space, determined they could be useful in the future (as in, millennia from then) against other empires, most likely the Shi'ar, and started developing the King Egg weapon, which remained unveiled until now.So it doesn't really fuck that much with the established continuity. No idea about the shifting thing tho.
>>145503132Silly anon doesn't know how long never is.
>>145502550That's not me. I'm the OP.Also, Busiek is better than Claremont so far.
>>145503132Why, what did he do?
>>145503151>far reaches of space,That's a little better. Still a bit too convenient. >Wakandans time traveling Of course they did. I'm surprised they didn't just incorporate Black Panther's Quest into the canon and use that.> invasion by the CotatiWell that's just stupid. "we come in peace, shoot to kill, shoot to kill, shoot to kill" The H'ylthri I could see even though they're technically extradimentional. They've done it before.
>>145503151The space shit in these comics is so bad.
>>145503824It was good for about 5 years, starting with Annihilation and ending with Thanos Imperative.>>145503743>> invasion by the Cotati>Well that's just stupid. "we come in peace, shoot to kill, shoot to kill, shoot to kill"Yeah. Empyre, it was pretty bad.
>>145504207>AnnihilationAnnihilation is at least as bad as Civil War and Siege. The affection it still receives is pure nostalgia.
>>145504207Annihilation is garbage.
>>145503567Not the poster, but Busiek shitted all over Vision, Hank Pym, Firestar, and Justice In Avengers and via Thunderbolts, fucked over several major villains (most notably Beetle, Zemo, and Moonstone) so they can't be used as bad guys ever again without people screeching and in the case of Beetle turning good, resulted in the creation of the obnoxious Poochie Girl Beetle, who is currently stinking up Amazing Spiderman
>>145504460Okay. I'll probably never read any of those series or characters, and I didn't like Thunderbolts, but I do like Astro City, so he's good.
>>145503151I need to stop asking about current comics
>>145505576Yeah, they're not worth it.
>>145494550It's not really the violence, so much as the drama. But if you have a problem with older comics, you may not enjoy it much.
good for you
>>145503132First I'm hearing of it.>>145504460Those are petty reasons.
>>145500345>>145501190It doesn't help that so many people defend these subpar stories, but those people seem to not want it to be good or popular.
>>145509285>those people seem to not want it to be good or popular.Claremont's X-Men was the top-selling title of the 80s.
>>145509325I'm talking about today.
>>145509362Modern comics would kill for Claremont's numbers.
>>145509375I'm talking about people today defending it despite knowing better. I guess it doesn't help that today's comics are even worse.Instead of treating some of these older comics as Shakespeare, people need to realize that they're mediocre at best, meaning today's comics are worse than shit. Then drastic changes need to be made so that comics are cool, popular, and good.
weird thread
>>145482272Man, Quitely is good. So good, and so detailed, that it takes a long time for him to complete work. I just looked up for you how many issues he actually did for the interiors of New X-Men. It’s only 10. Grant Morrison wrote 40 issues… so you can work out the math, I’m sure.Also, one of the other artists, Igor Kordey, fully admitted years ago that he rushed his issues, and it shows. The poor guy was drawing three series at the same time, monthly.
>>145472848Look, to a degree, I get it. Claremont fills those pages with too many words. It’s chased away the book’s best artists. But sometimes, you have to make the comic more subjective for you. Like, I hate to say it, but you have to use your imagination. Dave Cockrum is limited by a shorter page count of 17 issues compared to the usual 22. The recaps of these early issues take an especially grueling waste of time when you realize that until maybe 1980, they were releasing X-Men every 2 months. It’s not entirely the creative team’s fault. But yeah, the stuff can be dated at face value, unless you really make those drawings move for you in your head.
>>145462672I think what helped me develop a love for Claremont’s run was that: 1) I was probably 12 when I started, so my love is a genuine two decade long development; and 2) I didn’t read anything order for a couple of years. I found random back issues that were from all over f the different Claremont eras. >The series gets pretty much golden for one very specific addition that is coming right around the corner for you, and it is arguably the up and coming second most popular member of the team after Wolverine: Rogue. >Kitty, for the most part, gets progressively annoying.>Cyclops goes crazy and does something extremely drastic that will set off a nuke of drama for years to come.>Nightcrawler is cool. He keeps doing wonderful things. However, if you stick around long enough, Claremont does the most retarded thing possible, and writes him off the team, and he (as well as Kitty) remain in the Excalibur title for quite some time past Claremont leaving.>Storm gets a fashion makeover with the mohawk, and she gets a morality makeover abandoning her “no kill” rule. Wolverine, at some point behind the scenes, fucks her.>Colossus is probably the weakest character in the sense that he does have a personality, and qualities, but somehow he’s just “there” without doing a lot.>Many young bisexual coded girls come into the mix. Jean’s daughter. Colossus’s sister. Psylocke before she becomes Asian. You’ll probably hate all of them.Just read and enjoy, if you can. The series never really ends. Even the “end” of the Claremont uncanny run, #280, isn’t written by him because they canned him.
>>145512117I appreciate this post.What's fucking me up, I think, is that I've gone through so many comics before coming back to this run. I've grown pretty tired of a lot of common tropes in superhero comics, and it seems like many of them started here.I'll see how it goes.
>>145509537They're not classic works of literature, but they're some of the best superhero stories ever made.
>>145509375And readers would kill for that quality nowadays.
>>145512705>they're some of the best superhero stories ever made.I disagree.
>>145511327He spent years on Pax Americana also.
>>145510523in what way
>>145512117interesting
>>145509537Anon, maybe comics just isn't for you? Stick to normie shit your English teacher would approve of instead.
>>145516987I've read more comics than you.
>>145517094>I read Best Of listsftfy
>>145517142If that's all you've read, I've definitely read more comics than you.
>>145517230>doesn't know how greentext worksA casual *and* a newfag
>>145514286Minority contrarian take given that the X-Men became a multimedia juggernaut success because of these issues.
>>145509537>>145509362>>145509285>>145501190>>145500345What do YOU think is "good"?
>>145502550To be fair, Johns's GL is pretty good.>>145502891Personally I dig Busiek('s older stuff), but Secret Identity is mediocre.
>>145517236I know how it works.>>145518787They may have been popular and beloved because that's what we had at the time, but they are by no means good.
>>145519981This is like saying anything not written in recent history is bad because they were written in the now-somewhat-harder-to-read styles of their time.
>>145512705>They're not classic works of literatureThe people defending them sure like to imply otherwise.
>>145519981WHATDOYOUTHINKISGOODTHEN?
>>145520098>in the now-somewhat-harder-to-read styles of their time.Funny how this only applies to comics, huh? Films don't have this problem, novels sure as fuck don't have this problem, but with comics the best stuff is apparently thing you have to go in with an open and indulgent mind and forgive the low quality because "it's of that time".
>>145520216>Films don't have this problemOld movies don't have "old timey" dialogue? Are you even being serious?>novels sure as fuck don't have this problemThis is beyond absurd. Most people can't even read older grammar.
>>145520265The "old timey" dialogue has never been an issue.>This is beyond absurdAre you fucking serious right now? The greatest novels are all 70-80... 100, 200 years old. We still have things like The Illiad as some of the greatest written works of all time and you don't have to be lenient on those for being written "in the now-somewhat-harder-to-read styles", they're beautifully written.
>>145520098As others are pointing out, old books we know today are great, timeless classics. Old comics are not, yet they're treated like these old books.
>>145520216>Films don't have this problem, novels sure as fuck don't have this problemThis is a common complaint people with short attention spans have about both old films and old novels.
>>145520359Look man, I'm not talking about your zoomer neighbors that pride themselves on never reading a book and only watch what's on netflix. I'm talking about the mediums themselves and their masterpieces.
>>145520216>Films don't have this problemSilent movies and the early talkies have over-the-top hammy theater acting. A lot of early-mid 20th century movies have incredibly lethargic pacing. > novels sure as fuck don't have this problemTry reading Shakespeare without annotations. See if you have patience to get through Bram Stoker's Dracula, which is written in the form of letters and diary entries, or Melville's Moby Dick with all the whale infodumps. A lot of old fiction is very overwrought. Charles Dickens was paid per installment but a lot of people seriously believe he was paid by the word.
>>145520406>I'm talking about the mediums themselves and their masterpieces.So am I, and the average putz on the street finds nineteenth-century prose too demanding and switches off if a movie is in black and white.
>>145520447Moby Dick is pretty easy to read and it's god-tier.
>>145520337You're substituting reality with your own bullshit.
>>145520447>over-the-top hammy theater acting.This is more common today than then. You're also going as far back as the 20s despite the fact that by the 50s the medium is already producing timeless classics. Your examples aren't that strong considering Dracula is just schlock and not a masterpiece of the medium and people have that problem with Moby Dick because they read it in school when they aren't ready.>>145520452Do you not understand that you can't talk about books with people that don't read books.
>>145520337I want to believe that this whole thread is you doing a bit, because the alternative is that you really are this stupid.
>>145520538Yeah, you're right, the greatest novelists aren't Dostoyevsky, Hemmingway, Tolstoy or Dickens, it's Stephen King.
>>145520568You are so dumb it makes me sad knowing there are people like you in this world.
>>145520595Okay, so you really are just an idiot with an over-inflated sense of his own intelligence, meaning you're probably an autist.
>>145520568I don't think this guy is as familiar with the media he's name-dropping as he's implying he is.
>>145520608Nice projecting.
>>145520621I accept your concession.
>>145520544>This is more common today than then.Not that I've seen. Performances these days are natural, there's no exaggeration in terms of how people move or speak.>Your examples aren't that strong considering Dracula is just schlockIt memed the title character into becoming one of the most famous villains for over a century. Literally everyone knows Dracula. Just like how almost everyone knows the X-Men.
>>145520613Yeah, that much is obvious from the fact that he can't talk about any of this stuff except in vague generalities, and even then he's flat-out wrong (like when he talks about old acting styles vs modern ones).
>>145516987>Stick to normie shit your English teacher would approve of instead.The overinflated ego of capeshitters will never not be funny.
>>145520751Here's your (You), kid.
>>145520682You're being disingenuous, bad acting is memed on 4chan heavily with>I'M ACTINGTo say actors are now better than ever is amazing what with all these sitcom actors branching out into serious roles but never shaking off the bad acting that comes with it.
>>145520784Use specific examples and talk about what makes bad, and contrast them with specific examples of good acting (and talk about what makes it good).
>>145520817Specific examples would be to look at The Godfather, Taxi Driver, Apocalypse Now, 2001, Stalker, Lawrence of Arabia and the acting is top notch, best you can get out of the medium. And then you look at today and you have the likes of Adam Driver, Emma Stone, Brendan Fraser, Rami Malek, Michelle Yeoh. Acting quality is at an all time low. The 70 year olds are still jogging the 30-40 year old stars of today.
>>145521018This wouldn't even get a pass in a fresher class. It's barely more than a list. Nothing about your posts suggests you've actually seen any of the movies you've named or can give informed opinions about the performances of any of the actors.Stop blowing smoke up our asses and try again.
>>145521061Your posts are as empty as Claremont's narrations. You have said nothing, brought zero arguments to the table, there's 0 substance in your posts. You tried to pass off acting in older movies as bad when the reality is that acting in the 70s and 80s was on average better than it is today, significantly. At this point you're just trolling.
>>145521151>more running down the clockShit or get off the pan, cunt.
>>145521165Based indian putting the mayo man in his place.
>>145520265Old movies that we revere today have GOOD old-timey dialogue; old books have GOOD older prose.
>>145521768What is "old timey dialogue"?
>>145521810That theatrical dialogue in older movies and television. Like the way everyone speaks in I, Claudius or 12 Angry Men.
>>145521768>weWe who?>GOODWhich old-timey dialogue and prose are good? What makes them good?
>>145522170Elaborate.
>>145522204>We who?We the afficionados. >Which old-timey dialogue and prose are good?Most of the classics.>What makes them good?Many different factors. One is that they use the limitations of the medium to deliver excellent prose, performances, and stories. Even in the silent film era, you had talented people like Buster Keaton using minimal title cards, making most of the information known visually. Many great prose works had too many words, but they were delicious to read.Comics are in some ways less limited but get more things wrong, like the narration explaining what the art already conveys in comics that are considered classics. >>145522216No.You're going to have to watch them.
>>145522590>No.I accept your concession.
>>145523676What concession?
>>145522216In first person, or angrily.
>>145522590Isn't it obvious to everyone that this time-wasting tit is copy-and-pasting from LLM outputs?
>>145523993It's all from my own brainerino, friend.Well, most of it. Some, admittedly, is from out of my ass.
>>145472942>>145473008>>145473352>>145479693You're just coping. I really like his run but Claremont is verbose. There's a reason why other writers at the time made fun of him for it. Just look at Wolfman and Perez's Teen Titans. It's a lot less wordy and the art has far more room to breathe. And this only gets worse when Claremont returns
>>145471652>>145473701>>145476744>>145476757Imagine prefering garbage like Onlsaught to New X-Men. Face it Morisson saved the X-Men both critically and commercially. Go read your garbage Lobdell comics if it makes you feel happy but don't pretend that shit is any good, let alone on Morison's level
This thread is just peak 4chan>"Oh this critically acclaimed book that you like?! Well it's actually shit">"Oh this best-selling run that completely shaped the industry?! It's actually normie crap that only casuals read"None of you losers are cool for pretending to dislike these books. There's a reason why this website is dead and it's because retards like you kill any kind of discussion
>>145524426Onslaught might have been bad, sure, but not THAT bad.
>>145524374>Just look at Wolfman and Perez's Teen Titans. It's a lot less wordy and the art has far more room to breathe.bruh
>>145524223>actually my posts just happen to indistinguishable from LLM slopThat isn't a good thing, anon.
>>145524374>>145524426You aren't even trying at this point.
>>145524823This is just a cherry-picked page of two characters having a conversation. Of course there are going to be lots of words. The issue with Claremont's comics is that they are full of characters explaining what they're doing through speech bubbles which makes the wordiness a lot more noticeable
>>145524702Onslaught is so dogshit that it made people quit X-Men comics in droves
>>145525008>they are full of characters explaining what they're doingSo just like New Teen Titans and literally other Bronze Age comic.
>>145524426>Morisson saved the X-Men both critically True.>and commercially.No, X-Men and Uncanny X-Men were Marvel's best sellers throughout the 90s even though the lousy Davis and Claremont revolution runs.Lobdell and Nicieza and also Seagle and Kelly were at their best when they were telling the stories they wanted and not whatever events Harras and later Powers were pushing with the lone exception of the Age of Apocalypse event.
>>145525008>The issue with Claremont's comics is that they are full of characters explaining what they're doing through speech bubbles which makes the wordiness a lot more noticeableYou mean like this?
>>145524686We're having a discussion right now, redditor. Go back.
>>145525058You didn't read what I typed. Thought bubbles are normal, even tho by the early 80's they were already disappearing. The issue is that thought bubbles mixed with Claremont's overly verbose style makes the book unbearable. Thought bubbles are ok in small quantities but Claremont's style made them a chore to read
>>145525153>a discussionIt's one loner OP harvesting (You)s as a substitute for real-world physical contact and a bunch of anons humoring his autism.
>>145525170Retard, the part in greentext is your own mongoloid words:>they are full of characters explaining what they're doingProof that you're full of shit btw >>145525132
>>145525028Big if true.Still nowhere as bad.
>>145525132This is a completely normal page. I'm talking about shit like this
>>145524861What's so bad about the way I write?
>>145525089kek this is just untrue. The sales had dropped drastically and went way up with Morison.
>>145525327That reads fine to me. He's explaining things so that even the small children reading it can understand what just happened. Superheroes were written to be child-friendly back then, they stopped bothering in the 00s.
>>145525153Touched a nerve fatty? Seething at random opinions doesn't make you an intellectual
>>145462672>Why isn't a children's comic from the late 1900s written like a modern cape comic written for balding millennials?Anon out here asking some very big brain questions.
>>145525387Jean literally died in the previous panel... instead of letting the moment exist he has to give a massive amount of exposition which completely kills the tension that death had just created>He's explaining things so that even the small children reading it can understand what just happened Explaining why it's bad doesn't make it less bad. Plus he didn't need to explain it right away. Claremont could've waited. There's a reason why this is one of the main panels people bring up when criticizing Claremont's writing style
>>145525382You can check the stats yourself https://www.comichron.com/monthlycomicssales.htmlThe months before he came on to the title, they were hovering around 100,000. His first issue debuted at 144,000 and ended at 118,000. He raised sales by a bit, but 100,000 still made it a top five book.
>>145525466This is how Jim Shooter wanted comics written and he was right to do so given how Marvel has never reached his sales numbers.>There's a reason why this is one of the main panels people bring up when criticizing Claremont's writing styleI have never seen this happen. People criticize the following issue that was just a recap issue, and that's the way it is because he had to to write something quickly after Shooter forced him to kill Jean somewhat late in the process.
>>145525466>instead of letting the moment exist he has to give a massive amount of expositionIt's a Bronze Age comic, you dumb casual. They were all commented on the action like that. What do you think decompressed storytelling was a reaction to?
>>145525588>his is how Jim Shooter wanted comics writtenIt doesn't make it less bad and, like I already said, Claremont's overly verbose style makes it worse. A normal writer would've made it annoying to read. Claremont made it almost impossible.>I have never seen this happenIt's incredibly common. Even Moore criticized ithttps://www.google.com/search?sca_esv=55306307e7665ff6&sca_upv=1&sxsrf=ADLYWIJGt4uLj_9_XHZSpesfRr1-BeQN7A:1726778983672&q=alan+moore+dark+phoenix+saga&udm=2&fbs=AEQNm0Aa4sjWe7Rqy32pFwRj0UkWd8nbOJfsBGGB5IQQO6L3J_TJ4YMS4eRay1mUcjRHkZx0HlQjL9_oV9XCogbzlT-ivaCZ3f7ubIM_JRqCpvqXLg4XzTZQyxGdiYufN0oxUb--b36Vdm2Pkc3JXCAAqqtoFy9uxBF8JDzqhx-LhyF660iHxP8OqUNj4lA6z4y8EwCbY37Q&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjlo7X_8M-IAxX-TqQEHZZcJh4QtKgLegQIDhAB&biw=1440&bih=813&dpr=2#vhid=uAZNPpP63g25zM&vssid=mosaic
>>145525714Holy retard. Bronze age comics don't look like that. Hell compare that to Thunderbird's death. Imagine calling people casuals when you can't even tell what the conversation is about
>>145525855>Bronze age comics don't look like that.I know you're just here for (You)s but I'm going to link these counter-example for the benefit of any newfags who might see your carefully faked moronism and mistake it for sincerity>>145524823>>145525132
>>145525820>using google>in 2024Anon, what the fuck are you doing?
>>145525969I literally mentioned how those looked nothing like the picture I showed. It's the whole reason I brought it up. You understand that there is a clear difference between a long conversation between two characters or a bunch of heroes communicating and Cyclops just randomly explaining what happened to Jean seconds after her death through massive amounts of exposition, right? Then again you sound pretty stupid so the answer is probably no
>>145526056I couldn't post the picture of the quote so that's the second best things
>>145526070>I literally mentioned how those looked nothing like the picture I showed.Yes, but like with all your other posts, you're being disingenuous. Just like you disingenuously skipped the part saying the reply wasn't for you.
>>145526088Not. The. Point. Do not use google. Switch to a search engine that actually values privacy and where the hits aren't clogged with AI slop.
>>145526239>You're being disingenuous. I'm going to pretend I didn't see the part where you showed I was wrong by bringing up the already mentioned pagesDamn, you really showed me
OP here. Glad to see so many conversations going on.>>145524686There's no pretending here, at least not from me. I love comics and I like superheroes, and I wanted to get into X-Men. Claremont's run is still legendary, but now that I'm reading it, at 73 issues deep, I don't get why.>>145525459I like plenty of older comics and older children's literature, and I don't like modern comics. Now what?
>>145526548I'm not really talking about you. You actually explained why you didn't like the book instead of randomly just saying a universally praised run is terrible in response to someone stating they like it
>>145525820>Moore criticized itOoooooh then it must be bad. Maybe it didn't have enough rape for the old deranged hobo, too.
>>145525820Moore was no stranger to making wordy comics back then.
>>145526948I mentioned Moore because the anon said he had never seen anyone criticize it.>>145527079This page is obviously supposed to be more prose. Not really the same as a character just regurgitating exposition
>>145527175Well Swamp Thing was Sophistacted Suspense For Mature Readers, a direct market-only book for adults. Marvel's main line was meant to be kid-friendly.Here's what was going on in Avengers that month. Oh look, a character narrating his actions. Claremont didn't write this. It was the style Shooter wanted.
>>145526435Fuck off, retard.
>>145462672Super hero comics are soap operas for boys. If you don't like it, then maybe you'd prefer a different medium.
>>145527244Now let's take a look at what was going on with the Distinguished Competition. Oh look, characters thinking in great detail about the things they're shown doing. Because young kids need this to understand what's going on.
>>145527291Medium? Not genre?
>>145527259Damn you really showed me x2
>>145527717You're clearly desparate for attention, so have a free (You).
>>145527244>>145527329You can keep posting random examples of characters having inner expository dialogues. I never said Claremont was the creator or sole user of those, just that Claremont made them overly verbose. The fact that none of these looks anywhere near as bad as the panels I posted just shows that. The fact that Claremont's writing too much was an inside joke at Marvel proves it as well
>>145527798You just ran out of arguments and had to resort to random numskull-tier insults. I accept your concession
>>145527801This you?>The issue with Claremont's comics is that they are full of characters explaining what they're doing through speech bubbles (>>145525008)>Jean literally died in the previous panel... instead of letting the moment exist he has to give a massive amount of exposition (>>145525466)
>>145527821Have another pity (You).
>>145527893yeah? I also said this >Claremont's overly verbose style makes it worse. A normal writer would've made it annoying to read. Claremont made it almost impossible.
>>145527893You also didn't mention how the pages you posted have far fewer words than the one I posted
>>145527957Anon, the consistent pattern across your exchanges in this thread is this:1. You single out for disdain a feature of a Claremont comic (wordiness, exposition on things the reader can see happening in the panel) as though only Claremont did it.2. When anons post examples showing that Claremont's contemporaries were also wordy and used "unnecessary" exposition, you backpedal and say it's different when they do it.3. When challenged about this, you say you never claimed that only Claremont did these things, and that your original claim was that he did them badly.4. You continue to insist that this was your original claim even though we can scroll up and see that you did not begin from any such distinction.Anons think you're arguing in bad faith because that's exactly what it looks like you're doing.
>>145528410Nope, I claimed since the beginning that Claremont was overly verbose >>145524374and stated that his style was made worse by thought bubbles >>145524823 unlike the examples posted. I gave you an example of how Claremont was worse at this >>145525327 and you just kept posting pictures that were in no way comparable. I also made the point that Claremont was considered to be too verbose, even by bronze age standards, by his contemporaries, which nobody ever addressed
>>145528678>since the beginningWe both know that this post >>145524374 isn't where you entered the thread. You're doing it again, pretending that the things you said *after* getting called out are what you'd been saying from the start. Either you really are arguing in bad faith or you're too stubborn to own up to your own mistakes and will just keep doubling down till this thread 404s. Either way, I hope anons will wise up and stop wasting their time on you.
>>145528950Wait what? That's exactly when I came in this thread. When tf do you think I entered the thread? Also doubt they will because so far I'm crushing it
>>145529063
>>145529092That's exactly when I started replying to their messages. Again, when do you think I came into this thread?
None of the "bad" comics in this thread are actually bad. That one autist just has horrible taste.
>>145529194>"bad" comicsWhich ones?
>>145529171
>>145527801Good-natured self-deprecating humor.
>>145529408So you're just not gonna answer the question
>>145484488You are a faggot
>>145484661Stop being a faggot
>>145530078But I don't like X-Men, so I can't be a faggot.
Nothing in this thread is "verbose". /co/ really does not seem to be familiar with enough media to have perspective. You fags seem to think any comic with text on the page is "overly wordy". You're just looking for things to complain about. Most of you don't even read comics. You're only here to complain about them because you want to be like some youtuber that you saw making fun of comics.
>>145530508Spoiled by manga.
>>145462672this mf is everywhere, recently reading the captain britain omnibus for the alan moore and claremont is there at issue 1
>>145530508>/co/ really does not seem to be familiar with enough mediaQuite the opposite since comics are mogged by other media.
>>145525820>urlDon't do that.>>145526948Not helping your case.
>>145497684>>145497669just make out already
>>145525820Alan Moore's take on Claremont's X-Men is so pants-on-head retarded that you are only invalidating your own perspective by agreeing with him.
>>145531763That's absurd. You seem like kind of fag who thinks that "quality" = "like a movie".
>>145531763You really just kind of confirmed their entire post with your own lol.
>>145533764What's wrong about his take?
>>145527244Swamp Thing was for teens.
>>145526689Oh.>>145527291Much too late for that. I'm already two decades deep and I love comics.
>>145533784That's got nothing to do with nothing, small brain. Simply put, when you get a list if greatest films of all time you get fantastic films from the 50s, 60s or 70s. With comics, you get a turd like this.
Stop giving the anti-Claremont retard (You)s.
>>145533764>>145527175>I mentioned Moore because the anon said he had never seen anyone criticize it.
>>145496287It's a complaint that's really started to piss of /co/ in recent years I've noticed
>>145534991"Mature readers" means 17 minimum. It had R rated violence.
>>145536830People tend to look down on retards for bragging about being illiterate.
>>145484581I'd post this gif again if I could.I can't believe this ridiculous, shitty thread is still up.
>>145536975ruining the pace of the comic ≠ being iliterate
>>145537056I don't know when /co/ got this insecure and whiny but by god I don't know if you all went trans or what. Get a grip.
>>145537484This whole thread is nothing but pissy, roundabout arguments that go absolutely nowhere and make nobody happy, all anchored around OP's shit opinion.It's an awful thread from start to finish.
>>145537507The arguments are all valid, but the Claremont dickriders are all pissy manchildren sperging out over people having problems with his writing. I know /co/ has long since abandoned the mere idea of having a discussion about anything and the entire board is just bot-like spam of "bait" or wojacks.
>>145537088>ruining the pace of the comicA purely subjective reaction. Classic case of the reader blaming the writer for his own shortcomings.
>>145535753You have bad taste in movies.
>>145537613>A purely subjective reaction.Yeah, you get that when you get people's opinions. Do you think I'm arguing that Claremont's style is objectively bad?
>>145537525It's weird because the criticisms aren't even wild. They're some of the mildest things I've seen and people are still getting pissy. Compare it to the average criticism of guys like Snyder or Aaron for example
>>145537752>Do you think I'm arguing that Claremont's style is objectively bad?You sure talk like it.
>>145537680You have bad taste. Period.
>>145537813Ok seems like you can't tell when people are giving their opinions. No wonder you are so upset at a random's take on your favorite writer. I recommend that you go outside a little instead of seething all day because someone doesn't worship every aspect of Claremont's writing like you do
>>145537903You communicate poorly.
>>145537949You just have bad comprehension skills. must be why you love Claremont. You need everything spelled out for you
>>145537507I like classic Claremont but I can understand how people who only ever knew superheroes as written for adults would find it difficult to like. It's still nonsense to say it's bad because it's written in a way that kids can enjoy it. Adults of the time period where able to enjoy these stories just fine because they understood what the deal was.
>>145538257Ohhh snap.
>>145538479samefag
>>145529581I'd read The Man Filled with Fear...
>>145537507So, OP is a faggot, as usual?
>>145538630That's a given. He's right about Claremont though.
>>145538257>>145538479>samefaggingPathetic.>>145538351You're right, but zoomers can't think their way into earlier styles of storytelling. It's the same mental block that stops them from enjoying protagonists they can't self-insert as.
>>145538684>>145538544Kek try again
>>145538734Congrats on learning how to use inspect element. Condolences on posting in a thread where people know what it is. Nice try though.
>>145537056>>145537507Nobody has given a good answer as to what makes early Claremont so good. It's been nothing but excuses and accusations.
>>145538799Yes, because (You) aren't interested in the answer.
>>145538734Anon, the (you) tag shows up even if you're replying to yourself.
>>145538642>he'sYou're not very subtle.
>>145538807I'm very interested, but nobody here is willing to give it, if it even exists.
>>145538883>I'm very interestedin getting replies
>>145538883>I'm very interestedYou're not just dishonest, you're stupid to boot >>145538839
>>145538544>>145538684>being this much of a schizo loserYikes.
>>145538904Answers.>>145538912That's not me.
>>145538883You're attempting to communicate with people that never matured past the age of 8.
>>145525279It's not even true. The early 2000s with Morrison and the other writers who came in alongside him was the first time there was a noted exodus of longtime readers. New readers and his own fanbase made up the difference, by the end of that run they were having to prop the book up with star artists.>>145525545The sales boost from Morrison looked better than it really was because he was preceded by a four month interim run by Scott Lobdell between his run and Claremont. Retailers had assumed it would be uneventful filler material and under-ordered it, only for Colossus to die in the first issue.
>>145538967>>145538977>>145538992Here's your (You), samefag.
>>145539001It was funny how Lobdell had Wolverine kill Magneto to wipe the slate clean for Morrison like he had wanted in his pitch only for Morrison to "kill" him off himself in the next issue since he didn't actually intend for him to be Dead dead yet, but he kept that as a closely guarded secret.
>>145539112>he kept that as a closely guarded secret.He wasn't communicating with any of the other writers at all, which affected how their books reacted to things happening in his title. IIRC something similar happened when he was working on Batman.
>>145539143Or even the editors. Magneto herding New Yorkers into ovens blindsided Marvel and they decided to just roll with it and retcon it the month after he left rather than demand last-minute rewrites that would make the title late/potentially result in him leaving prematurely.
>>145539039I knew you wouldn't have an answer, let alone a good one.
Reminder that the real reason Morrison is pissy at Marvel isn't because of Marvel storyelling, it's because his colleagues didn't treat him like the Second Coming and asked to be let in on his plans so they could plot their own books accordingly. The whole Gentry thing in Multiversity is just sour grapes disguised as commentary on the state of cape comics.
>>145539196I knew (You) would come back for more (You)s, and sure enough, here (You) are, back for (You)r fix.
>>145539216Moz doesn't care about other writers, he just didn't like how Jemas rejected Marvel Boy 2 because Marvel only wanted to do grounded stories that looked and felt like the Blade, X-Men, and Spider-Man movies. DC offered him an exclusive contract that would allow him to do almost anything he wanted, so he took it.
>>145539324>Moz doesn't care about other writersMoz spent his early days badmouthing other writers for attention. Nothing has fundamentally changed since then, he's just gotten smarter at it.
>>145539039kek not a single one of those comments is mine dumbass
>>145539165Due to issues with a DC editor rewriting some of his JLA stories to try and make them more comprehensible, he'd admitted to submitting scripts to Marvel as close to the deadline as possible, so they'd have no time to demand rewrites, and openly threatened to quit if they rewrote anything themselves. Marvel took an approach of just letting him do whatever he wanted and they'd try to fix anything they didn't like or that fans hated after he was gone.
>>145539409(You) would say that, wouldn't (You).
>>145539434KEK at this point you're replying to randoms thinking they're me. You also haven't been able to explain why I'm wrong regarding Claremont.
>>145539389Popular more established writers like Moore. The people who have griped about being left in the dark by Morrison were lesser-tier writers like Chuck Austen on Uncanny, Chuck Dixon on Batman and the Outsiders, and George Perez on Superman.
>>145538839Yeah, but if I'm samefagging, the reply to the "oh snap" comment would have a (You).
>>145539465It took (You) several posts, but congrats on finding (You)r Shift key.
>>145539517But I thought these were me? >>145538977>>145538992
>>145539494>The people who have griped about being left in the dark by Morrison were lesser-tier writersYes, but that isn't who The Gentry are.
>>145539563(You) say so, Element Lad.
>>145539216It's actually because Marvel is shit.
>>145540122So is DC (hello Geoff Johns), but again, The Gentry aren't actually about the quality of Marvel comics.
>>145540167DC is occasionally great. Marvel is pure shit.
>>145540179Anon, "console wars, but for comics" is for the birds. Do yourself a favor and grow out of it.
>>145540215I just call it like I see it, boyo.
>>145540282Likewise, and following writers > following companies.
>>145540359True, and one publisher had better writers and they didn't fuck them over at every corner.
>>145540371>one publisherAnon, your mind is still shackled by corporate logos. Free yourself.
>>145540407It is not. Between the two, one is pure shit and the other is sometimes shit sometimes great. Beyond that I don't go to war for publisher and I read from more than just those two.
>>145540437>Between the twoSee? Still stuck in the corporate binary.
>>145540474Not at all, my furry little friend.
>>145540496Nevermind, one day you will.
>>145540514You seem obsessed.
>>145540568With what?
>>145540371All comics pros are bastards.
>>145540600>xitterGo back.
>>145540577This "console war" bullshit.
>>145540644We've only been talking for a handful of posts, anon.
>>145540617I have substack too. People blog where they blog.
>>145540656And yet you still seem obsessed. Not that I would call this "talking".
>>145527079am I looking at some artificial impregnation?
>>145540750Swampy's getting raped by a machine, yes.
>>145540674Guess we have different ideas about what obsession looks like. To me, obsession looks like the anons writing long, detailed and sometimes meandering replies to OP itt.
>>145540671>bloggingAKA attention whoring. Go back.
>>145540760You keep replying and not saying much, just being bothered by the fact that I said Marvel is pure shit.
>>145540817>You keep replyingThat's how conversations work.>and not saying muchSpareness > prolixity.>just being bothered by the fact that I said Marvel is pure shit.Not at all.
>>145540909>Not at all.Your actions say otherwise.
>>145540946Then you've misinterpreted them.
>>145541227Not at all.
>>145541431Good sir, I regret to say you have. Think we can keep this up till 500?
>>145541489>sirOh... so you were...
>>145541644You lost me, anon.
Well this thread just fell apart, didn't it?
>>145542466Your fault.
>>145542466Start as you mean to go on.
>>145543565https://youtu.be/QV3jy-FBP3Q?si=mfwVxV_EG6gh4-LwApheX-Men would be interesting.
Still no answer.
>>145544557OP is a faggot and so are (You).
>>145537768>Compare it to the average criticism of guys like Snyder or Aaron for exampleThey absolutely had it coming, never produced anything worth respect. Claremont needs a good editor, but at least has some classics under his name.
>>145525459i'm not balding and x-writers sure as fuck are not writing for millennials
>>145545188>i'm not baldingSounds like something a balding millennial would say.>and x-writers sure as fuck are not writing for millennialsZoomers aren't reading comics. Only old fucks like you are.
>>145545261i actually have luxurious hair that's so thick that it keeps me from cleaning my scalp if it grows to me shoulders>old fucks read, therefore they must be the target audiencethat's not how that works. if we read something we dont' like we don't pay for it. it's not for us, it's for little shits like you that want to troll a thread about comics by talking shit about comics. you want comics to be bad to talk shit to people because you have nothing else in your life to do. that's how miserable you are. you sure you aren't an x-writer?
>>145544940Classic turds maybe.
>>145536964>>145534991it literally says SUGGESTED. any of us at 14 or 15 would have been fine reading alan moore swamp thing, literally no one would have been traumatized if an LCS sold swamp thing to a younger teen. please.
>>145539001>>145539112I think the only uneventful issue back then was the Cyclops one, ironically the only one with that cool new costume.>Magneto already "dead">A whole mutant island to explore>Nooooo oi wonted to do that>kill off Magneto again (to bring him back later)>kill off Genosha to have "mutant cultures" pop up everywhere else>Look at moi new ugly mutants, original, roight?>annoyed Morlocks.jpgWhich moloid hired him, again? Jemas or quesada?
>>145545335>i actually have luxurious hairI bet it even looks great in the washer.>that's not how that worksWrong. Proof: You know what's happening in every X-book right now.
Why is everyone so defensive?
>>145546651(You) sound defensive. What're (You) hiding?
>>145545401Yeah and albums with swearing only said "Parental Advisory." It was the store's discretion on whether or not they'd sell it to you. Just like it'd be a theater's discretion whether or not to let an unaccompanied minor into an R-rated film. It was not Comics Code Authority approved, it was not for kids.>>145545557Quesada was the Morrison fan who felt personally betrayed when he found out about the DC deal at a convention, and went to yell at him in public over it.
>>145547416t. wasn't there when Swamp Thing was on the stands.
>>145547497I know what the culture of the 80s was like and this is not a book a lot of parents would feel comfortable with their kids reading. They didn't even like their kids playing Dungeons and Dragons and here's a book about demons and witchcraft and blood and occasional swearing.
>>145542466It fell apart when the OP made it
>>145547893Media panics amplified the dumbest voices and didn't represent what was actually happening on the ground. Most people simply did not care.
>>145547967Brush up on your history https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comic_Book_Legal_Defense_Fund#History
>>145548339Brush up on being there.
>>145548383You clearly weren't.
>>145548424t. experienced the 80s through Stranger Things and vaporwave
>>145548476Nothing I'm saying even relates to Stranger Things where young kids play D&D and no one's concerned about it which isn't my experience. I had a friend whose mother absolutely forbid it and this was later.
>>145548540Yes, yes, very interesting. 70 posts to go.
>>145548573New thread in 69 posts.
>>145548648>New threadDoubleplusungood>69Nice
>>145547914No it was going alright until recently.
>>145550078Fake and gay, just like (You)
>>145550154Wrong.
>>145544940>never produced anything worth respectJust say you have bad taste
>>145551601Wang.
>>145525170Claremont basically writes novels over the art. He doesn't just give exposition, which other writers did (especially in Marvel style books where the writer has to clarify things that aren't clear in the art), but he has the characters learn lessons, express themes, etc. in thought balloons. Though of course even in a novel you usually only get one character's thoughts in a scene, but Claremont liked to give everybody's.It is verbose and easy to mock, though sometimes it can give the comics extra richness because there is so much information packed into every panel. This page even has some humor by showing that Nightcrawler thinks the Beast is fearless while the Beast's actual thoughts are that he's going to run away and call the Avengers.
>>145552114True.
>>145552114This is awful.
>>145554095Well, I picked it as the most extreme Claremont page, so yeah, this is close to unintentional self-parody. To be fair it's just from extra pages that were inserted into old X-Men reprints in the '80s. But that sort of shows what people like about Claremont, which is that even in this obvious hackwork he tries to think through how every single character would feel. When he's at his best (obviously not here) readers accept the absurdities of his style the way they might accept some novelist with a strong sense of character and very obvious flaws.
>>145552114>>145554223This may be an extreme example, but reading page after page of lesser versions of this wears you down. The moments before the big fight that was to decide Phoenix's fate near the end of the Dark Phoenix arc were a few pages similar to this, and it, along with the big, dumb fight and the following issue with Scott moping about, absolutely ruined any sympathy I could possibly have for Jean and removed any impact her death may have had on me.
>>145551899>an unironic Aaron fanWell there goes the neighborhood.
Based.
>>145556301Aaron is a fag and a retard but Scalped is much better than anything Claremont ever touched.
>>145552114>Claremont basically writes novels over the artNo he doesn't. And see, this is the problem, you Claremont defenders always bring up novels and say "if you think that's a lot of text then you should try a novel" and when it's pointed out that Claremont does not write on the level of an actual novel and that his text is mostly recaps and over explaining things you immediately go for the "well it was made for kids" excuse and just try to discredit the entire medium for no reason and now you're back to this.The problem with Claremont isn't just that he's wordy, but most of the text is empty, it shouldn't exist in a visual medium and if this were a novel, this level of writing would be classified as hack. I get that some of you like his plots, but his actual writing skills are very poor.
>>145557766Well said. It's a bunch of excuses, deflection, and insults from some of the Claremont defenders.I'm not convinced that some of you actually like his work, because many of the posts don't involve any kind of love for it (and the ones that do aren't the ones spitting anger). It seems to be more about hating the opposition of this consensus you've aligned yourselves to.Do you really, truly like these comics? If you do, why? Tell me what the fuck is so good about it that motivates you to attack anyone that says otherwise.
>>145558087>It seems to be more about hating the opposition of this consensus you've aligned yourselves to.Hit the nail on the head. This is what /co/ has become for the past couple of years. We used to have conversations here, debates, now all we do is steal memes from twitter and post shipping faggotry.
>>145557766>>145558087>>145558293Obvious samefag is obvious.
>>145472848>I'm made of laffy taffy, motherfucker.
>>145494687Muir Island Saga can be considered as one?
>>145557766>just try to discredit the entire medium for no reasonBut this is how the specific subgenre of superhero comics started.> it shouldn't exist in a visual mediumYou claim to be literate yet are unable to comprehend "kids need this to understand the story" When I was a young kid, I was full of frustration whenever I tried to watch or read something written for adults because I had difficulty understanding the stories. The mind is simply too undeveloped, this is why children's books, cartoons, and comics exist. After the comics code authority went into effect, DC published comics strictly for little kids. They even did remakes or reprints of stories after three years or so because that's when they expected the previous readers had grown out of them. Stan Lee came up with the notion of writing for a general audience in a way that was still considerate to kids, then DC followed suit in the late 60s through the 70s. Stan also had a rule that there could be no panel without any text, even if it was just a narration box saying they were going to let the art speak for itself. He ended up relaxing on this in the late 60s.
>>145552114True. I'm the guy you're actually replying to and that's definitely what I meant. I enjoy Claremont's writing a lot but it is overly verbose and paired with the style at the time it can get boring, especially when you read a bunch of issues in a row. The worst for me is when a character has to narrate how they're going to attack or move somewhere when that could simply be shown by drawing it. It's part of why I enjoy Paul Smith so much. After he arrived the art became more important from a story-telling perspective
>>145559332If you want to read non-wordy Claremont, try his Wolverine mini-series with Frank Miller and his "End of Greys" story in Uncanny X-Men: The New Age #4.
>>145559278>But this is how the specific subgenre of superhero comics started.And it had plenty of time to evolve in 30-40 years.>You claim to be literate yet are unable to comprehend "kids need this to understand the story" You're basically just saying kids are retarded but children's books like Alice in Wonderland are far better written and don't treat the reader like some autistic imbecile. Same for all the fanasy books kids read.>When I was a young kid, I was full of frustration whenever I tried to watch or read something written for adults because I had difficulty understanding the storiesThat's a you problem. Me and other kids my age were watching all the r rated movies of the time and we never once felt "frustrated" about not getting something.
>>145559278Anon, the other guy you're replying to (>>145559454) is not arguing in good faith. He isn't interested in learning about older comics. He just wants to be the loudest the peson in the room. Concentrate on this guy >>145559332 and don't give >>145559454 any more (You)s.
>>145559278I disagree with what you're saying because I don't believe children need to be coddled. You're talking about the 60s but Claremont got on the title in the mid 70s and stayed throughout the 80s and his "style" was outdated by then. Furthermore, I don't subscribe to the idea that superhero comics should be told in a certain style, nothing needs to be done in a certain way and when people come over with revolutionary ideas like Frank Miller or Alan Moore, they're hailed as geniuses because they broke outside of that mold. Thinking outside of the box has never been a bad thing. But I do appreciate you at lest trying to have an argument even though I don't agree with it, much better than baiting retard like this fellow >>145559699 that have nothing worth saying but still feel the need to shitpost. I would like to have this conversation with you some other time when such retard is not present to spam his useless shitposts like he has in this thread.
>>145559454>>145559736Samefag.
>>145559454>And it had plenty of time to evolve in 30-40 years.It did. Marvel and DC's mainline was still written primarily with kids in mind. This didn't end until the early 00s.>You're basically just saying kids are retarded but children's books like Alice in Wonderland are far better written and don't treat the reader like some autistic imbecile. Same for all the fanasy books kids read.Alice's Adventures in Wonderland is written at a seventh grade level, Through the Looking Glass at sixth. That's a bit higher than what they wanted.>Me and other kids my age were watching all the r rated movies of the time and we never once felt "frustrated" about not getting something.The age you were actually watching these matters. Development is a gradual process.>>145559736>You're talking about the 60s but Claremont got on the title in the mid 70s and stayed throughout the 80s and his "style" was outdated by then. Claremont's X-Men was the best-selling comic of the 80s, if it was considered outdated (like almost everything at DC was at the time before the Crisis reboot), it wouldn't have even sold. Consider that the reason it was the best-selling comic by far because it was the easiest for little kids to understand.>when people come over with revolutionary ideas like Frank Miller or Alan Moore, they're hailed as geniuses because they broke outside of that mold. Miller and Moore were pioneers when it came to making superhero comics exclusively written for adults and got a lot of deserved acclaim for that, but the current state of the industry shows how short-sighted it was to build the main line around that.
>>145559926>That's a bit higher than what they wanted.... you think comics were written with 4-5 year olds in mind instead of 10-15?
>>145560017That's cartoon adaptation level, so a bit too young. Roughly 8-12 or so. Teenager is a bit too old, the expectation was that you'd drop comics and start getting into girls. I got into comics in the third grade and felt it was socially unacceptable to be open about it in seventh grade.
>>145560133You're being a bit disingenuous. Comics were always niche and by the 80s the demographic had risen. Comics didn't shift to being written for adults either.
>>145472848You're not entirely wrong. Some issues, especially early on, a real slog to get through. And Eric The Red was always stupid.
>>145473169>But they're not saying anything of substance hereThey're commenting on the situation while expressing their personalities. I get some of you gripes but most of the lines here have a purpose even if they're redundant.
>>145560461>have a purpose >they're redundantWhich is it?
>>145560473I meant to say some of them are redundant.
>>145559401Oh I've read all of Claremont's original X-Men run including the Wolverine mini, but thanks for the recs.>>145559699Dumbass I'm the guy you originally accused of farming (You)s. You're so obsessed you don't even know who I am anymore
I'm looking for a what if X-Men series that I have read at least a decade ago. In the first issue it had Gambit battling (I think) Emma Frost as a witch I think and had a kind of fairy talesque voodoo vibe.Do you Anons have a clue what it was?
>>145560266>Comics were always nicheComics were a part of pretty much everyone's childhood from the 1940s-90s until they pulled out of the newsstands and went direct market.>Comics didn't shift to being written for adults either.In the 70s, Marvel started publishing mostly-black and white magazines intended for adults without Comics Code Authority oversight. A lot of these were cancelled after just a few years since the market just wasn't there yet, though Savage Sword of Conan was by far the most popular and long-running, lasting until 1995 even, because a lot people love their Conan. In the 80s they had their Epic Comics imprint and Original Graphic Novels, but most of these didn't really leave a lasting impression.Over at DC, Camelot 3000 was their first direct market title published without CCA-approval intended for adults. They claim that some kids still got a hold of it and found it confusing and upsetting. Swamp Thing volume 2 started off as a kid-friendly CCA-approved title and the first 9 or so issues of Moore's run also had the stamp, though they were sleeping on the job. They eventually realized "Wow, this is not appropriate for children," took the approval away, and went direct-market only. In the meantime, DC published a few other direct market-only titles like Omega Men, Sun Devils, and Jemm Son of Saturn, but they didn't truly hit the big time until Watchmen and Dark Knight Returns from 1986, so they kept at it.
