Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login
The John Byrne Forum
Byrne Robotics > The John Byrne Forum << Prev Page of 8 Next >>
Topic: He’s not the Hulk I know. Post ReplyPost New Topic
Author
Message
William Ferguson
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 25 June 2012
Location: United States
Posts: 39
Posted: 10 August 2018 at 4:29pm | IP Logged | 1 post reply

I hear what you're saying Brian. I really don’t expect anything will change. 

Like Disney's classic characters, Marvels characters have evolved (for the better in my opinion). Steamboat Willey is not the Mickey we know today. Same as the Spider-Man today is not the Spider-Man Stan and Steve created. 

My time has passed, I get that. My characters are gone. But if Marvel truly wanted to make these characters great again, go back to the essence of who their characters are and what makes them great. Clearly define who your characters are right now, and stick with it. Regardless of what some new hotshot artist or writer thinks is cool.

I don't care how famous a writer you are, Spider-Mans origins had nothing to do with a mystic totem. He was bitten by a radioactive spider.

Hail Hydra!  
Back to Top profile | search
 
Greg Kirkman
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 May 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 15775
Posted: 10 August 2018 at 4:38pm | IP Logged | 2 post reply

At some point, you have to let go.




Today's Hulk is not Lee and Kirby's or Lee and Ditko's. He may reference them as justification for growing a second head or turning pink, but he will never again be that clear and direct a character. We have no hope of ever retrieving the Len Wein version either unless we're bring him out to laugh at him. We're so-o-o-o-o much cooler than that now. That we can mock things proves it.

++++++++++++++


This is the absolute truth. I've come to realize it, myself.

These things have a shelf-life. There comes a moment where too much time has passed, and they can never return to what they once were. Their existence becomes one of deconstruction, mockery, and constant reinvention by people who don't understand or respect them. Hacks with no sense of history take over these properties, and have no interest in telling proper stories which are faithful to the established lore and spirit of the material.

The four cornerstones of my life as a nerd--Marvel Comics, DC Comics, STAR WARS, and STAR TREK--are all dead. But their corpses continue to be paraded around.


And so I let them go.



I recently came across this, and found it to be spot-on:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=koRDkbklPVQ

It's all dissolved into a disgusting slurry of self-referentialism, deconstruction, sociopolitical agendas, and mockery. No more heroes, no more wonder, no more fun.
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Olav Bakken
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 15 June 2014
Posts: 241
Posted: 10 August 2018 at 5:18pm | IP Logged | 3 post reply

"Like Disney's classic characters, Marvels characters have evolved (for the better in my opinion). Steamboat Willey is not the Mickey we know today. Same as the Spider-Man today is not the Spider-Man Stan and Steve created."

That's really two different mediums. The comic book version of Floyd Gottfredson's Mickey Mouse and Carl Bark's Donald Duck don't have much in common with their cartoon shorts.
And the comic versions of Cloak and Dagger were created when they became guinea pigs for a new and experimental synthetic drug. The TV-show explain their origin as some mysterious force under New Orleans. I would have preferred to original creation, but as mentioned, it is a different medium.

Sometimes a little change do make sense. Like Iceman losing his ability to shoot ice cream from his hands. Or the way a story is told. In the old days thought bubbles often contained long explanations about what was happening. Superman is shaking hands with the president, and the next image might focus on Lex Luthor standing in the crowd, with an evil smile, and a though bubble that says: "Hehehe, Superman will never guess that I have infected the president with a highly contagious virus I have invented. Harmless to humans, but deadly for kryptonians. Finally I will have my revenge."

"But if Marvel truly wanted to make these characters great again, go back to the essence of who their characters are and what makes them great. Clearly define who your characters are right now, and stick with it. Regardless of what some new hotshot artist or writer thinks is cool."

Which is why concepts like Hidden Years is a good idea. Choose a specific period in a title's run, and pretend everything that has occurred ever since never happened.

I remember how excited I was when I saw Marvel would publish Blade the vampire hunter, expecting the title to be a continuation of Tomb of Dracula. Unfortunately it felt like nothing of the world established in the 70s comic.

Still, if I was a comic book writer, and DC or Marvel told me that they were going to "totally reboot several of our titles, and we want you to do this one. If you say no, we will just find someone else who will, and give them practically free hands to come up with their own vision of the character", then at least it would be an opportunity to keep the elements that made it popular in the first place.

There seem to be a tendency to make the superhero titles more mature today, both in art and stories (and also more in line with the TV and movie versions). The comics I loved when growing up had a universal appeal to all ages. At least I still enjoy reading them again now and then.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Dave Phelps
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 4178
Posted: 10 August 2018 at 7:28pm | IP Logged | 4 post reply

 Wallace Sellars wrote:
Does the "Renew Your Vows" storyline put them back together?


It's not really a "storyline." It's an alternate reality where Pete and MJ never split up, some years went by and they had a daughter. When it became an ongoing series, the kid had powers, they found a way to give MJ some abilities and the series was basically "The Spider-Family" (think Marvel Family). At the beginning of the second year, they jumped the timeline ahead and the series seems to be basically a redo of Tom DeFalco's Spider-Girl, albeit with a little more focus on Peter and MJ. It looks like it might get cancelled with #23, roll into a "Spider-Girls" mini this October (tying in to some Spider-Man crossover story) and then who knows?
Back to Top profile | search
 
Adam Schulman
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 22 July 2017
Posts: 1717
Posted: 10 August 2018 at 7:37pm | IP Logged | 5 post reply

Al Milgrom brought back the grey Hulk. Peter David worked with the grey Hulk for a few years. He had the personality of the Hulk circa 1963. The "Mr. Fixit" storyline lasted less than two years, and I really doubt anyone who first encountered the Hulk at that time would've ended up thinking that the "essence" of the Hulk was "Las Vegas tough guy." Certainly not when the grey Hulk/Mr. Fixit lost his ability to stay as the Hulk during the day. 

I think some people on here worry too much about "real change versus the illusion of change." The only "real change" that seems to be permanent is the aging of characters. I don't think that we'll ever see a 15-year-old Peter Parker in a comic called THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN ever again. That much is true.

Other than that, any "real change" can be reversed. Not happy that Magneto is a Jewish Holocaust survivor? At some point we'll find out that it was all a lie, if we haven't already (I don't read any of the X-titles). 
Back to Top profile | search
 
Dave Phelps
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 4178
Posted: 10 August 2018 at 7:56pm | IP Logged | 6 post reply

 William Ferguson wrote:
If I remember correctly Dan had mentioned johns changes to the fantastic four as an example of why it was okay for the kind of stories he was telling of Spider-Man. Dan missed Johns point, like I did, the illusion of change.


The argument there is that, if it's okay for the She-Hulk to be on the team with minimal signs of Ben for 32 issues, then why is "wrong" for Jane Foster to get to be Thor for a few years or Doctor Octopus to take over Peter's brain for year or so? One of those I liked a heck of a lot more than the other two but I'm going with underlying principles.

And illusion of change is a good model to follow but what constitutes that can vary by reader. Was moving the Inhumans to the moon an illusion or a true change? I'd argue illusion since "remote" on Earth wasn't meaning what it used to by then. If you consider the central conflict of the Hulk series to be "Hulk vs. Banner" that allows all sorts of variations while still holding to the central theme. Etc., etc., etc.      

(And Al Milgrom was the one who turned the Hulk gray, btw. Peter David certainly ran with it, though.)


 QUOTE:
Stay true to what makes these characters so appealing for so many years.


But what if part of what makes them appealing for so many years is their ability to adapt with the times and/or the occasional temporary direction changes? Changes of pace can be fun for readers new and old alike.


 QUOTE:
I’m not trying to argue with anyone here. I just miss my characters.


Well, every long timer gets to go through THAT at some point.   

Who are the real X-Men? JB would say the original five, preferably in their school uniforms. I'd go with the "All-New All-Different" group (albeit with Kitty Pryde in place of Banshee and Wolverine in the JB designed outfit). Others will vary.

Is Superman's Kryptonian heritage intrinsic to his very being to the point where keeps a giant sized diary in Kryptonese and calling on Kryptonian deities in times of shock or peril? Or is it an all but incidental detail that happens to explain how he's carrying cars over his head? Is the S something cool his adopted father came up with or the Kryptonian symbol for hope (bleh)?

Maybe it wasn't a huge percentage of the overall readership, but I guarantee there were some disappointed Jay Garrick fans when DC revived the Flash series and it wasn't Jay. Someone could have been reading Green Arrow month in and month out for over 20 years and then been really shocked when GA grew a beard, became a "bleeding heart" and swapped his junior partner for Black Canary (pretty good trade, there, but still...).

Either you learn to live with/love what takes their place or you move on.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Dave Phelps
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 4178
Posted: 10 August 2018 at 8:00pm | IP Logged | 7 post reply

 Adam Schulman wrote:
Not happy that Magneto is a Jewish Holocaust survivor? At some point we'll find out that it was all a lie, if we haven't already (I don't read any of the X-titles).


I think they tried to do that during the Seagle/Kelly period but it didn't take. (Or maybe it was just the "Erik Lehnsherr" id they got rid of.)
Back to Top profile | search
 
William Ferguson
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 25 June 2012
Location: United States
Posts: 39
Posted: 10 August 2018 at 9:07pm | IP Logged | 8 post reply

The argument there is that, if it's okay for the She-Hulk to be on the team with minimal signs of Ben for 32 issues, then why is "wrong" for Jane Foster to get to be Thor for a few years or Doctor Octopus to take over Peter's brain for year or so? One of those I liked a heck of a lot more than the other two but I'm going with underlying principles.
—————————
This the point I’m trying to make. She-Hulk joined the Fantastic Four. She didn’t become the Thing. The Thing had his own book. I could still read stories about Ben Grimm the Thing.

Jane Foster became Thor. The Donald Blake Thor was replaced. 

Spider-Man / Peter Parker was replaced. 

Captain America becoming an agent of hydra... why?  They just got done having Bucky as Captain America, and the Falcon as Captain America. 

If you want to do a Freaky Friday story go for it. Just make it for a couple issues, not a year long change. 

Also, the Inhumans moving to the moon was a location change. None of the characters essence changed with that move. Their location was not essential to the characters.



Back to Top profile | search
 
Shawn Kane
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 04 November 2010
Location: United States
Posts: 3239
Posted: 11 August 2018 at 7:02am | IP Logged | 9 post reply

I remember, as a kid, being excited about changes. I loved new line-ups, costumes, and powers. I didn't like the moves to Hydrobase, Four Freedom's Plaza, or Australia though. Over the years (especially late 80's and the 90's), things like character deaths and "what you thought you knew was wrong" happened too much. I had to quit reading comics because my Marvel, and to a lesser extent DC (I only started reading when JB took over Superman), were no longer recognizable to me. The Avengers were running around with men unshaven and sporting team jackets. Pouches and guns were the norm with new characters who had generic powers and it really seemed like my notebook full of superhero names and concepts I had in 5th grade had been hijacked and used by the creators of the time period.

I started buying comics again in the early 2000s and proceeded cautiously because reboots seemed to be the thing of the day. It seemed with each reboot, characters became less heroic. Creators now decided that the Hulks rampages HAD to have had innocent lives taken, the Purple Man was a pretty prolific rapist, Hank Pym was a serial abuser to Jan (even if all this was implied in older comics, it was never specifically stated because of the ramifications it would create)...and why? Because an editor-in-chief didn't think that comics are for kids? I don't buy most of the comics that come out from the Big Two today because they won't be able to repeat the experience I got when I originally read those Marvel comics of the day. I can still find a couple that I like but when the X-Men (my all-time favorite comic book until Chris Claremont left) becomes a Fantasy Draft every time they reboot and all the other characters need new costumes whenever they reboot PLUS the fact that they reboot annually it seems, Marvel has lost much of what made it special for me.

An important point made in this thread that nostalgia exists for your entry point. I was talking to one of the employees and the period that I quit was his entry point. Spawn #1, bought when he was 7, gives him the same feelings I have for the Byrne, Simonson, Miller, Claremont, Stern, and Michelinie era that created my love. Another employee loves much of what Marvel produces right now because his entry point was about 5 years ago and he's a movie fan. Both have actually started reading the store's collections from "my" era and they love what they're reading and they understand why it's beloved but it's still not what turned them on to comics. It's basically the same as when I read Lee/Kirby/Ditko/Thomas/Buscema/Heck for the first time: a lot of love for those stories but not necessarily MY Marvel.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Dave Phelps
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 4178
Posted: 11 August 2018 at 7:56am | IP Logged | 10 post reply

 Shawn Kane wrote:
I remember, as a kid, being excited about changes. I loved new line-ups, costumes, and powers. I didn't like the moves to Hydrobase, Four Freedom's Plaza, or Australia though. Over the years (especially late 80's and the 90's), things like character deaths and "what you thought you knew was wrong" happened too much.


We're certainly more open-minded during our "formative years," but I also like to think the folks in charge when I started were simply better at it than those who followed. :-)

I blame X-Factor for the increase in character deaths. Not to say there hadn't been resurrections before, but this was the first time a recognized "classic story" was overturned and no one seemed to mind. That just seemed to open the floodgates and now no one really thought whether or not a character termination was a good idea since "we can just bring them back anyway."

(Note that I'm only talking about hero resurrections. Villains died and came back all the time. (I've taken to calling it "the villain's cliffhanger".) But to me that was more about not wanting to end every story with the villain ending up in jail.)


 QUOTE:
Creators now decided that the Hulks rampages HAD to have had innocent lives taken,


That was one of the weirdest storylines. The premise for shipping Hulk off into space was "people are DYING! We need to DO SOMETHING!" but then the key element in the World War Hulk story that ended the overarching plot was "unless someone did something to screw with him first, the Hulk has never killed anybody." I don't get it.


 QUOTE:
PLUS the fact that they reboot annually it seems, Marvel has lost much of what made it special for me.


Yeah, the only way I can read Marvel (and DC) anymore is to think of the current series as adaptations of the old stuff.


 QUOTE:
An important point made in this thread that nostalgia exists for your entry point.


Indeed. One person's "the book/character has lost its way" is another's beloved childhood memories.


 QUOTE:
It's basically the same as when I read Lee/Kirby/Ditko/Thomas/Buscema/Heck for the first time: a lot of love for those stories but not necessarily MY Marvel.


I sort of agree, but what bugs me about Marvel these days is that it doesn't feel like there's a throughline between what I grew up with and the current stuff. Back in the day we DID have that. Dr. Doom escapes certain death by using the power given to him by the Ovoids. Later I get Marvel Masterworks v.2 (actually it was probably the relevant Marvel Saga issue) and look - there's the story where Dr. Doom gets that power. The Black Widow and Hawkeye have a brief moment in Avengers #239 (I think) and I get the old Avengers run and I get to see their relationship. So even if the garden's a little different, I can at least see the seeds.

Meanwhile, in the 80s West Coast Avengers, Hawkeye is adamant that Avengers don't kill. Now he doesn't seem to care. What changed? I can't say I've read every Hawkeye story that's appeared in the interim or memorized the ones I have read, but I genuinely don't recall any story where his world view actually changed. He was just written differently one day. Jason Aaron had a scene in Thor with Thor in Jane in bed together in Asgard from "years ago" and I'm not sure when that could have happened. Certainly not during the Lee/Kirby period. (Although now it occurs to me there was a brief "reunion fling" in the 70s, so maybe I should do more research before whining. Ah well. :-) )
Back to Top profile | search
 
Mike Norris
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 4274
Posted: 11 August 2018 at 10:37am | IP Logged | 11 post reply

 
 QUOTE:
Not happy that Magneto is a Jewish Holocaust survivor?
No, I can't say that I am. 
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Brian Hague
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 14 November 2006
Posts: 8515
Posted: 11 August 2018 at 10:56am | IP Logged | 12 post reply

I wrote an X-Men parody where the caption describing Magneto read, "He'll say he spent time in a Nazi concentration camp. What he won't tell you is that he was one of the Nazis." 

Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 

<< Prev Page of 8 Next >>
  Post ReplyPost New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login