| Author |
|
Robert Lloyd
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 17 October 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 238
|
| Posted: 08 January 2015 at 6:26pm | IP Logged | 1
|
|
|
I'll never forget this era because when Byrne went to DC I started following all the former Marvel artists on DC titles. I wanted to know what would he would have done with the Hulk; however when I saw Superman:The Man of Steel Mini-Series I couldn't wait for each issue.
Before that I'd only buy Superman on a rare basis. Although I loved Curt Swan's art, but they were representative of the 50's style George Reeves Superman era. He was more of a father figure type than an action adventure hero.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Stephen Churay
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 25 March 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 8369
|
| Posted: 08 January 2015 at 10:26pm | IP Logged | 2
|
|
|
John Byrne: A curious thing happened. For a while there, we all
seemed perfectly "cast," with Walt on THOR, Roger on AVENGERS,
etc. Then somehow we all seemed to take one step to the right.....
====
No doubt about that. When I got in comics, it was that particular time.
SECRET WARS II was really the blow that seemed to mark the end of
that era. Some titles were still good for a while longer, but it's never
really been that good since. 99's HEROES RETURN was about as
close as it ever got.
Your HULK run really had the makings of something special. There
were rumblings of a return of a Hulk that more resembled Kirby's. If
true, I'm really sad we didn't get to see that.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Carmen Bernardo
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 08 August 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 3666
|
| Posted: 09 January 2015 at 5:25am | IP Logged | 3
|
|
|
I'm reminded of the old cliché: it if ain't broke, don't fix it.
Jim Shooter seems to be of the mentality that likes to tinker around with stuff even after it gets working, which leads to it getting broke again.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Robert Lloyd
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 17 October 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 238
|
| Posted: 09 January 2015 at 4:24pm | IP Logged | 4
|
|
|
That's true of Secret Wars II. When I saw The Beyonder...he looked like a disco dancer. Where o' where did this seem a good idea? The entire New Universe was not something I was remotely interested in. I read Shooter's blog and he does portray himself as a hero who saved Marvel. Shooter at one time was a good writer, however that was where his strength was.
In the end it was DC's gain. So many artists and writers that I liked at Marvel migrated to DC....which made DC a better company. I was more of a DC fan more so in the 80's because all my favorites from Marvel were on titles I'd never think of reading until they came along.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Stephen Churay
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 25 March 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 8369
|
| Posted: 09 January 2015 at 6:24pm | IP Logged | 5
|
|
|
I went through the same thing Robert.
JB went to SUPERMAN and ACTION,
George Perez started WONDER WOMAN,
Mike Grell was on GREEN ARROW,
BATMAN and DETECTIVE were good reads
Giffin and Maguire on JUSTICE LEAGUE
BLUE BEETLE and THE QUESTION were interesting books,
as was the SHAZAM, AQUAMAN and DEMON mini series.
It wasn't that Marvel didn't have anything to offer but DC instantly
became attractive to this reader. I didn't become a true Marvel fan
again until Heroes Return.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Jason Schulman
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 08 July 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 2473
|
| Posted: 09 January 2015 at 11:39pm | IP Logged | 6
|
|
|
When the NEW UNIVERSE titles started I simply didn't understand what they were about or why I should care about them. I was too young at the time, I guess. Later on -- by the time they'd been phased out -- I got what Shooter was trying to do with them but gathered that they'd been carried out in something less than a competent way.
I started sliding away from Marvel in general when there were too many X-titles and I didn't like any of their increasingly convoluted storylines. I really hated Rachel Summers -- an ill-conceived character to begin with -- co-existing with a Jean Grey who was never Phoenix to begin with.
And this was before the introduction of Cable, Bishop, et al.
And then Spider-Man married Mary Jane, out of the blue, with no serious build-up. It made no sense to me. And I felt like I was the only one who HATED the Michienie/McFarlane stories. So no more Spider-Man for me after 1990. (And I NEVER believed that the Hobgoblin was really Ned Leeds!)
And the Avengers got really off-kilter after Roger Stern suddenly left, aside from JB's all-too-brief run on AVENGERS WEST COAST.
And while I understood what Steve Englehart was trying to do with FANTASTIC FOUR, I didn't think it worked at all.
I did like Peter David's HULK at least through the end of the Grey Hulk stories. After that it kinda meandered.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Brian Miller
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 28 July 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 31284
|
| Posted: 10 January 2015 at 7:51am | IP Logged | 7
|
|
|
What about Rachel Summers was "ill-conceived to begin with"?
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Don Zomberg
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 23 November 2005
Posts: 2355
|
| Posted: 10 January 2015 at 10:43am | IP Logged | 8
|
|
|
The same thing as just about every other whacked-out idea Claremont shoved into the X Men once the steadying hand of JB was gone from the tiller, Brian.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Steven Myers
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 10 June 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 5700
|
| Posted: 10 January 2015 at 10:53am | IP Logged | 9
|
|
|
Rachel Summers was fine as a one-off character in an alternate future. Having her join the present-day X-Men was downright silly. And I may have read Excalibur if not for her presence.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 133555
|
| Posted: 10 January 2015 at 11:06am | IP Logged | 10
|
|
|
The biggest problem with Rachel, as she came to be portrayed, was that she served as a constant reminder that the X-Men had failed again. The whole point of my story was that "Days of Future Past" did NOT create an alternate timeline in which the Sentinels conquered the world. Of course, Chris screwed that up with the "incestuous lesbian kiss" moment, and once that happened he just kept going back to it.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Brian Miller
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 28 July 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 31284
|
| Posted: 10 January 2015 at 11:13am | IP Logged | 11
|
|
|
The same thing as just about every other whacked-out idea Claremont shoved into the X Men once the steadying hand of JB was gone from the tiller, Brian.
**************
That's not "to begin with". That's AFTER "to begin with". What Claremont did after that first story doesn't mean the character was terrible in that first story.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 133555
|
| Posted: 10 January 2015 at 11:21am | IP Logged | 12
|
|
|
What it all comes back to is that Rachel was plotted (by me) to be Scott and Jean's daughter. The Death of Phoenix rendered that impossible*, and all such references were removed. But the seed was sown in Chris' head, and as I learn, no idea was ever abandoned. Ever. So, since Chris was putting in Phoenix references everywhere he could, he had to find a way to make Rachel still be Scott and Jean's kid.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |