Amph Older comics are uber-dense and uber-not-very-good

I was reading some 80's stuff (Secret Wars II and tie ins...why? because I owned it) and I was blown away by how dense they were. The number of panels per page was like 8 or more on average, and the number of talk bubbles on each was 2-3 paragraphs. Compared to today's maybe...2 sentences that's a lot.

I was expecting this, but I didn't expect to notice it so much. It was hard to read (yeah, I DO need glasses)

Not only that, but so much of the text was just explanatory stuff that nowadays just isn't used because the everyone knows this stuff. I swear, everytime an X-Man or villian showed up it would be a paragraph declaring his name and powers.

Enter Colossus: "I, Colossus, will switch to my living steel skin form in order to resist the bursts from Klaw's sonic rays." Even Spider-Man would do it sometimes..."Good thing that I have the proportionate agility of a spider so I can dodge your attacks, Doctor Octopus."

Not only is it not in character for most of them, it just reads bad. Who doesn't know Spider-Man's powers in 1985? Meh, no wonder the industry crashed.

 

Nowadays, most writers let the artists tell expository dialogue of how the characters are fighting and how they're using their powers. It makes for a much smoother read that almost all modern writers use now with a few exceptions (i.e. Chris Claremont who still has his characters verbalize everything they are thinking and doing)

 

In fairness to the creators of the time, the excessive exposition and explanation of powers, intentions, etc. was an industry standard that was designed to keep new readers reading, and remind occasional readers who may have forgotten -- or lost the story thread -- since the last time they picked up an issue. Loyal, regular readers just accepted it as a necessary "evil", so to speak; after a while of reading comics like this, you don't even notice it anymore. You just skip over the redundant balloons.

At the other end of the spectrum, now that this kind of expository info is left out of most comics, I find it difficult to get into any series that I'm not already familiar with. The recent "New Krypton" run in the Superman series is an excellent (awful) example of this, because I didn't know 80% of the regular cast and did not understand how they fit into the story or what their purpose was. I was out of my element and as a result I was underwhelmed and underimpressed.

If wordy word balloons interrupt the artwork or the flow of the story, okay fine -- but throw me a bone, for heaven's sake! Give me a short paragraph explaining who X is, and why he is relevant to storyline Y in relation to current event Z. Otherwise new readers will be frustrated and are likely to ditch the series rather than keeping up with it.

 

Whatever happened to mysteries becoming clear as the story developes? I agree there's a lot of characters in the Super-books New Krypton arc, but to say they aren't showing you who's who and what they're up to does the books a disservice.

 

I can't speak for other series, but don't forget when Secret Wars was released the idea of a massive cross over event was rather new. IIRC it had only been done once or twice before on this scale and wasn't very popular. I would hazard a guess that the heavy exposition was for the benefit of the more loyal fanbase who may have only been familiar with a specific book, not all of them. So being thrown into the mix with dozens of characters they are unfamiliar with, it helps to have things explained to them. Sure Spidey didn't necesarily need it, but I know it came in handy for me explaining why Rhodey was Iron Man or why no one knew about it, or about the female Captain Marvel.

 

Part of this is actually a DC/Marvel thing. Marvel puts a recap page on this first page of every comic it publishes (#1s may be an exception). The recap gives people a who's who and who did what to catch them up to speed in that individual issue. DC does nothing like this and this is not the first time I've heard of new readers becoming alienated by DC's confusing continuity and lesser known characters.

In addition a full monologue from each character explaining their powers can be negated by a small caption. Recent issues of Uncanny X-Men have been doing thins. Rather than have Cyclops say "I will use my optic blasts to blast my enemies! Good thing I have my visor which helps hold back the uncontrollable energy that I must face on a daily basis!", they have a small caption under him that says "Scott Summers 'Cyclops' Uncontrollable energy blasts from his eyes" and that's it. It makes for much smoother reads and familiar readers can skip over the unwieldy exposition much easier while new readers can quickly get up to speed with all the characters.

 

Good points all around. I also want to point out that Secret Wars II and its attendant tie-ins were not exactly heralded as brilliant at the time it was published. In fact, nearly everyone -- fans, critics, kids on the street with no basis of comparison -- hated it like the plague. So reading this mess of a series and making sweeping generalizations about the era that produced may not be fair to the medium or to the other great work that was available at the time.

Try picking up some of Simonson's run on Thor from 1983-1985 (#337 - 4??). It's about the best super-powered mythological hero comics you can possibly imagine. Or Frank Miller's run on Daredevil from slightly earlier: moody, gripping criminal melodrama. Also, any issue of the Savage Sword of Conan you care to pick up, from any year 1974 - 199?, will probably knock you proverbial feetwarmers off. And of course the Claremont/Byrne/Austin run on X-Men from the late 70s - early 80s is legendary, potent stuff (Dark Phoenix anyone?) And the Stern/Buscema/Palmer era on the Avengers is nothing to sneeze at. Heck, for that matter the first Secret Wars is terrific comics: dumber than snot, but so well crafted and action-packed you probably won't even notice that the plot makes little sense.

On the DC side, the Starlin era on Batman from the mid-80s was (IMO) probably the best run that series has ever had. Superman's rebirth under the caring, careful hands of John Byrne from 1986 - 1987 was stunning. And George Perez' work on Wonder Woman from the same period is dense, novel-quality material.

So chuck out your entire SWII collection and go read some good comics from the 80s. If you're turned off by that wretched excuse for a sequel, with the Beyonder appearing in white Michael Jackson form like a beacon of the future, then you know exactly how we all felt at the time it was first published.

 

Also Marvel has reprinted Vols 1 & 2 of Simonson's Thor run, hopefully Vol 3 will follow, as Vols 4-5 are easily available. All 5 volumes form one superb arc and are well worth trying.

 

The other reason is that every issue was going to be someone's first. Especially in a crossover setting. The writers of the day had to make sure that newcommers understood who was who and who did what. Sometimes they would have to explain the actions because of the limitations of the artists and the time crunch.

 

Older comics represent an "older way of reading or interpretation...I will rarely pick up an 80's comic and find little patience in reading it from beginning 2 end... i just say...if it's (the story) is "worth" your time, u will read it.

The pacing and narrative has changed in most all media...3hrs of a movie even.

Some r worth it...the classics...but the 80"s were a bit "wordy".

 

I agree with both you guys about Simonson's Thor - it's one of my favourite comic-book runs.

 

I've just trained myself to skim over the redundant narrative. Doesn't really bother me.

The flip side of the coin these days seems to be too many writers writing for TPBs with stories that could be resolved in two or three issues being stretched out to five or six. Personally I find that far more annoying.

 

I think has more to do with editorial mandate than the writers choosing that method. That's just what I've heard, I could be wrong though. You will still occasionally see one or two issue story arcs as these are easy to add on to the end of a 4 issue arc in a trade. 3 issues are almost unheard of nowadays though.

 

Any responses to all this from the author of this thread? FlareStorm, what do you say to our suggestions to scuttle Secret Wars II for the trash that it is (and was acknowledged as such at the time), and try some other, far more worthy 80s comics (see examples upthread)?

 

Old comics are the best. Silver age stuff is so crazy and anything by Kirby is better than you can find out on the shelves today.

 

I rather like older comics more than newer comics. At least old comics weren't stuffed with silicone-enhanced bimboes 24/7.

Of course I have to say I dislike the Silver Age DC comics, especially the Batman and Superman ones. The characterization sucked, the plots usually sucked, and Superman could move planets! Planets!!! Superman shouldn't ****ing be that strong, ******!

 

I really like comics from the 70's and 80's; I think that once the 1990's kicked in there was all this hype about computer graphics in comic books, and special bronze covers with the holograms. That's not why I read comics. I liked the art form and story-telling of comic books, not the hyped alternate covers etc. Now the comics from 50's are hard to read. They are 2nd grade level reding.

 

Probably not the best choice of phrasing.

 

A small "appendix," for lack of better phrasing, would do nicely at the end of the comic. Small paragraph on character abilities/bios/where to find more info. They do this occasionally with TPBs, but a little more frequently would be nice, imo.

 

The Superman books did a "Secret Files & Origins" book back when "Codename: Patriot" hit. Not to mention that every issue makes reference to who the supporting cast is for each book. Everytime a Legionnare appears, there's a footnote for that member. Plus the main characters have a short bio on the title page.

 

Contrary to popular opinion, there were some damn fine stories done in the 1990s in comics, people only ever remember the dross: Like a 10-foot tall supersoldier with 6-foot shoulder pads and a 20-foot long super-cannon! With female companion that has a boob-to-waist ratio of 3:1 minimum.