View Single Post
Old January 11 2009, 10:16 PM   #60
Spookman Spiff
Pumpkin Space Flavor
Spookman Spiff's Avatar
Re: Dark Avengers - Your thoughts

M'rk, son of Mogh wrote: View Post
darkwing_duck1 wrote: View Post
Why? Because they were BETTER COMICS. Richly writtten, with characters and stories that respected their origins. We CARED about the characters, we cared about the outcome of the plots.

Go onto every and ANY comic book site and say this until you get laughed off the forums. Everybody knows that, yes, though the 90's had their diamonds in the rough (Peter David can do no wrong as far as I'm concerned, even when he was mandated to join in on the universe-wide stories which, unlike today, weren't as well planned), the 90's was the worst thing for comics long-term.

Variant covers, super-duper holographic please buy me covers, Onslaught, Heroes Reborn, Marvel vs. DC, Image "we don't need good writing to sell stories!", the clone saga... it was all about flash. Hence image and the superstar artists. Plots and writing was not what the 90's are known for, it was the pictures and art.

It's because of this that Marvel went bankrupt, you don't see comics at newsstands these days, and MANY (I've heard up to 2/3rds) comic shops had to close down.

No. The 90's brought very little good to the industry. Cherry pick the good stuff all you want, it's undeniable that there WAS good there. But it's not an even balance by any stretch of the imagination.
Exactly. The '90s were so bad that Comics Should Be Good actually has a dictionary entry for "'90s Good."

Commenter Todd Lawrence reminded me of this concept when he was discussing Karl Kesel’s Daredevil run in an entry last week. Lawrence brings up a strong point - during the 1990s, there was a number of good comic books. However, there was also a special subset of comics that were what I am now defining as “90s Good.” There was such a high supply of awful comic books during the 1990s (I think the highest percentage of bad comics came from this time period) that some comics of the time, while not really being good comics on their own, are considered good comics when viewed through the context of the times.

To wit, anyone re-read James Robinson’s WildC.A.T.s run recently? It is not bad, but nor is it anything amazing. And it certainly pales dramatically to his Starman work (heck, even to his Firearm work). Yet his short run on WildC.A.T.s is remembered so fondly that it even gets a special mention in his Wikipedia entry - “Robinson also wrote a brief but very well remembered run on Wildcats.” It IS well remembered, but it is funny that they used that term, as I think that is a great way of looking at it, it is well REMEMBERED, but that is because it came out in a sea of utter crap, so Robinson’s pretty good run on WildC.A.T.s stands out so much that when we think back to that time, his run stands out as quite good.

So yeah, for those comics from the 90s that were pretty good but are remembered as better because they came out during the 90s I am going to refer to as “90s Good.”
"Love means never having to say you're ugly."
- Dr. Phibes
Spookman Spiff is offline   Reply With Quote