What again?! Groundhog day comic style...

[crimsonquill]

I stumbled across this article on Newsarama today: http://www.newsarama.com/comics/020902-Groundhog-Day.html

and it brought up a topic that I wondered could be added to by the community: What comic trend would you like to see stopped?

For me.. Crossovers/Epic Events that are there just for the sake of generating sales buzz. Marvel and DC have beaten this dead horse about 4 miles into the ground at this point. I don't really need to name examples because one event was loved by some fans and another could be spawn of debates that last forever. I really didn't mind crossovers that were held within a mini-series or a few select titles since it happened only once a year so the writers could actually move their own titles past the aftermath of the event before the next "armageddon" came along to "break the interweb in half".

Anyone else want to jump in? Anyone?

- CQ

[steamteck]

 I really hate killing off or destroying characters  just because the current people see no use for them and/or for shock value. It diminishes the total mythology and is rude to future generations. It seems to be forgotten today that these writers and editors are the current caretakers not the independent creators.

[daglob]

I really hate killing off or destroying characters  just because the current people see no use for them and/or for shock value. It diminishes the total mythology and is rude to future generations. It seems to be forgotten today that these writers and editors are the current caretakers not the independent creators.

I go with Steamteck. How arrogant does someone hgave to be to think that just becasue THEY can't think of things to do with a character, no one else can, EVER? Put 'em in hibernation, send them to the past, have them get married and retire, let them lose their memory and dissapear. Eventually, SOMEONE will have an idea for a story line involving that character.

Of course, if they are dead, then all they will have to do is think of a way to ressurrect them... like has been done many times before.

I still don't like it.

[Valandar]

I really hate killing off or destroying characters  just because the current people see no use for them and/or for shock value. It diminishes the total mythology and is rude to future generations. It seems to be forgotten today that these writers and editors are the current caretakers not the independent creators.

I go with Steamteck. How arrogant does someone hgave to be to think that just becasue THEY can't think of things to do with a character, no one else can, EVER? Put 'em in hibernation, send them to the past, have them get married and retire, let them lose their memory and dissapear. Eventually, SOMEONE will have an idea for a story line involving that character.

Of course, if they are dead, then all they will have to do is think of a way to ressurrect them... like has been done many times before.

I still don't like it.

Which, of course, leads to the "Revolving Door of Death" made famous in the pages of X-Men...

[lugaru]

Honestly I've never really cared what anyone does with characters so long as they do a good job about it. So on that note if somebody is doing a good job, dont take them off the book in exchange of a higher profile writer.

In Marvel I have seen this hapen on Captain America, Avengers and Fantastic Four where somebody is having a great run but wait, it looks like a big name writer wants a crack at the character so time interrupt the current run. I'm sure it happens with DC comics too but I dont really read any titles there regularly.

[steamteck]

Honestly I've never really cared what anyone does with characters so long as they do a good job about it. So on that note if somebody is doing a good job, dont take them off the book in exchange of a higher profile writer.

In Marvel I have seen this hapen on Captain America, Avengers and Fantastic Four where somebody is having a great run but wait, it looks like a big name writer wants a crack at the character so time interrupt the current run. I'm sure it happens with DC comics too but I dont really read any titles there regularly.

Gotta agree with you on this one big time. Good point.

[AncientSpirit]

There are two (related) trends I would like to see stopped:

1) Splash pages with no inherent value.   Where you know the impact on the book would have been exactly the same if the image had been in one of the tiniest boxes on the page.   To me, this is just a way for the comic company to fill pages.  

2) Art sequences with no dialogue, no inherent added value.   These artists think they are creating films where I have to see every pose and  approach that SuperX_______ takes to fly towards the sun.    One panel of SuperX flying to the sun would do ... but again this approach fills up pages.

I used to have subscription service at my local comic book store but had to end it when I realized that too many books were using art as filler to pad stories.    Now, I thumb through the book, and see how much filler there is before I buy.   Sometimes, there is so much that I feel like I actually read the story just by looking at one page of dialogue ... and the last page.

Sheesh.

   

[steamteck]

Try looking at some of these modern style stories beside classic Marvel etc for level of story content and you'll be really horrified.

[Zippo]

I actually like the occasional splash page and action frames without dialog. I can't stand the old style of storytelling where the hero essentially narrates his actions.

[steamteck]

I like the snappy banter in combat myself. I think modern writers just don't know how to install voicpacks 

[lugaru]

Some more annoying things:

"New character beats up the big guy". I swear characters like Doomsday and Killer Crock only exist to be beaten up by the new big threat, proving that the new big threat is at least as tough as the last guy who pounded on that punching bag.

"Retcon always on". I think it is annoying to try to tie everything in all the time. This other guy always existed but was wiped from memory? Someone else was the murderer of your family all along? You went back in time and invented sliced bread? Ugh. I think it is lazy and I see it done way too much.

"Nothing is unique". Ok... 2 hulks, a bunch of supermans, lanterns of every color, junior versions of every hero, multiple clones of every dead character... I know some of these serve a purpose but talk about watering down your product.

[steamteck]

"Nothing is unique". Ok... 2 hulks, a bunch of supermans, lanterns of every color, junior versions of every hero, multiple clones of every dead character... I know some of these serve a purpose but talk about watering down your product.

I particularly share your dislike for this trend. Its like "lets expand the universe by making everyone less special" It does go right along with the new character who is like the old but more powerful and/or hard core.

[daglob]

There are two (related) trends I would like to see stopped:

1) Splash pages with no inherent value.   Where you know the impact on the book would have been exactly the same if the image had been in one of the tiniest boxes on the page.   To me, this is just a way for the comic company to fill pages.  

2) Art sequences with no dialogue, no inherent added value.   These artists think they are creating films where I have to see every pose and  approach that SuperX_______ takes to fly towards the sun.    One panel of SuperX flying to the sun would do ... but again this approach fills up pages.

I used to have subscription service at my local comic book store but had to end it when I realized that too many books were using art as filler to pad stories.    Now, I thumb through the book, and see how much filler there is before I buy.   Sometimes, there is so much that I feel like I actually read the story just by looking at one page of dialogue ... and the last page.

Sheesh.

   

The "splash page every other page" style of art has been one of my pet peeves for years. The artist is, in part, responsible for the pacing of the story. The splash page or whole page panel will usually stop the momentum of the story. Sometimes you waht this, sometimes you don't. I realize that the fewer the panels on the page the higher the price you can get for the artwork, but this is sacrificing the story for economics. The comic reads like driving with your foot on the brake: Vroooommmmmm(SCREECH!)Vroooommmmmm(SCREECH!)Vroooommmmmm(SCREECH!)

Some artist see the work of other artists and try to copy it, but they copy it randomy, and out of context. You see, most comic book artists have a set of techniques they use to tell a story (Wally Wood once did somethign like "12" Story Telling Techniques"). This involves a lot of things, such as layout, figure definition, background detail, scads of tricks and techniques. In effect, the artist has a language that tells the story. Dramatic shading in panels that have no drama in them is useless. Dynamic poses in panels where nothing happens is useless (unless you are Jack Kirby. And, come on, NOBODY is.). Page after page of silent panels can lose your audience if they can't follow what is going on. Not everybody is Jim Sternako, and can pull off three pages without dialogue (see SHIELD #1). Too many try to do Wally Wood dual light sources, even if it means that the light has to pass through some solid objects to make the effect they draw.

We won't discuss anatomy (or lack thereof).

All artists have influences. Jim Sternako's included Wally Wood, Burne Hogarth, Jack Kirby. He took from them and added his own ideas, but he looked, not at what they did, but at WHY they did something in a particular instance.

I also hate the... adultification?... of comics. Adulteration might be a better word. I don't mind making comics current, set in the present, and all, but some things to make the characters less "heroic" and more "human" bother me.

My favorite example is Hal Jordan. They took a hero and decided to make him an attention deficiet, irresponsible jerk, with arrogance instead of courage, and without enough concentration to run a flashlight, much less a power ring. So the silver-age version WAS a bit of a chauvanistic jerk, he was first and foremost a HERO. The funny thing was, while this was going on in some comics, in others he was being treated like a seasoned, knowledgeable, effective, "profesional" super hero. Basically, like the siver-age version grown older and wiser.

So, characters are given criticla faults, psychoses, and anti-social tendencies to make them more "real"?

I have plenty of reality in my own life; I can use a little fantasy.

[Talavar]

"Nothing is unique". Ok... 2 hulks, a bunch of supermans, lanterns of every color, junior versions of every hero, multiple clones of every dead character... I know some of these serve a purpose but talk about watering down your product.

Don't forget alternate gender versions of every hero.  I know this one's as old as the hills (practically) but it's still lazy, and also waters down the product.

[AncientSpirit]

Another crappy trend I hate ...

Putting out "specials" using lame artists who draw your favorite characters like they were bad cartoons.    I used to follow the Fan4 whenever they had "special" issues.   But the rendering of the characters were so amatuerish that I couldn't read them.

[steamteck]

[
I also hate the... adultification?... of comics. Adulteration might be a better word. I don't mind making comics current, set in the present, and all, but some things to make the characters less "heroic" and more "human" bother me.
So, characters are given criticla faults, psychoses, and anti-social tendencies to make them more "real"?

I have plenty of reality in my own life; I can use a little fantasy.

I agree. I don't want my superheroes to seem morally inferior to  just little old normal me. I often when I pick up a comic  in recent years feel like they're trying to recreate classic tragedy in a superhero story which is really not appropriate even if they had the skills for it. They don't so it becomes a muddled mess of naturalism which really has no place with the classic characters.

[lugaru]

I also hate the... adultification?... of comics. Adulteration might be a better word. I don't mind making comics current, set in the present, and all, but some things to make the characters less "heroic" and more "human" bother me.

I actually dont mind that, but that is because I started reading comics in the 80's when characters where having marital problems, money problems and ideology problems. For me as a kid comics where a peek into the grownup world with enough capes and superpowers to keep it interesting. The fact that comics (mostly Marvel) have tried to appeal to more mature readers has angered traditional comic book readers... but stuff like the Cyclops psychic affair with Emma, Matt Murdoch becoming the Kingpin and the Punisher getting an adult title really makes me happy.

[livewyre1014]

I agree with both sides of the mature comics arguement, and I think this is the dividing line between the two big dog companies.  Marvel has always been more in touch with "the real world" as far as their characters go.  Yes, Peter Parker can stop Dr. Octopus from destroying the skyscraper in the middle of the city, but can he do that AND make his rent payment AND keep a girlfriend AND have time to join Aunt May for tea?  Yes the X-Men are heroes who save the lives of millions of people on a nearly daily basis, but they are also mutants which alienate them farther from the mainstream of society.  Their image as outsiders is also tainted by the actions of other, less morally inclined mutants who ruin their rep.  Marvel tells compelling stories no doubt, but there exists such a level of realism that sometimes, their just hard to read(especially since Cap's gone.  Rest easy soldier, you did all you could)

This is why I prefer DC myself.  The characters have "grown up" in recent years from the campy, all smiles and no real danger comics of the fifties, so that more compelling and involved stories can be told for more mature audiences, like myself.  However, DC readers in contrast to their Marvel counterparts, are presented a universe that is obviously more escapist from our own in many ways.  Clark Kent can leave work whenever the world needs Superman by giving Perry a lame excuse that no one ever really calls him on, and it is just assumed that he still gets a paycheck and pays his rent in a timely and mild mannered way without us having to read about it in every issue.  The extreme power levels of some of the DC characters, as well as the grand scale of many of their adventures, along with the more favorable reaction of mainstream society towards the heroes makes the DC universe a little more sunny than the Marvel universe, and offers the readers more of an escape from our own(and I mean this with no offense) but our own hum-drum lives. 

There, I just drew a line in the sand between the DC and Marvel universes...everyone choose a side.  ha ha