Originally posted by willRules
Didn't Stan Lee and Jack Kirby do that for the medium by bucking the stereotypical superhero trend with the creation of Spider-man?Going further back, didn't characters like Superman add a new genre called the "superhero" to the comics that came before it?
Each time someone does something new or popular or outlandish or something important for the medium, but that's not really the point is it?
You even said in one of your first posts on this thread that the older stories were revolutionary but cheesy. Why is Moore any different to those that came before, when compared to the newer talent? I'm sure we agree they paved the way for the modern writers to build upon. 🙂
Because Moore didn't write characters that felt they had to do a cheesey one-liner after every punch they threw.
If you're really gonna say that Moore is one of those older writers, considering he still writes today and has never wrote in the style that you and I agreed is archaic, then I'm not sure I know how to respond because that's nonsense.
When I said older, I meant from the '60s and prior.
Besides, comics weren't taken seriously until Alan Moore, and he is still relevant to this thread because he's still writing today. Excellently, at that.
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Because Moore didn't write characters that felt they had to do a cheesey one-liner after every punch they threw.If you're really gonna say that Moore is one of those older writers, considering he still writes today and has never wrote in the style that you and I agreed is archaic, then I'm not sure I know how to respond because that's nonsense.
When I said older, I meant from the '60s and prior.
Besides, comics weren't taken seriously until Alan Moore, and he is still relevant to this thread because he's still writing today. Excellently, at that.
-AC
Older compared to what? You seem to have a very specific definition of what constitutes and older writer. I wasn't only just comparing writers from the 60's. You might have been, but I wasn't. Is Moore and older writer than Stan Lee? No. Older than Brubaker? Yes.
I think Alan Moore is a great comic book writer. Whilst his style is developing due to the fact he still is writing today, that could be said of most writers who wrote for a period of time. My point was that modern writers often develop off of the works of the past. Moore wasn't something entirely new. He offered different direction but even he wouldn't have done so well without Stan's cheesy one liners.
To say that Moor didn't feed off earlier work and in turn the more modern stuff fed off Moore, now that's nonsense.
Originally posted by willRules
Older compared to what? You seem to have a very specific definition of what constitutes and older writer. I wasn't only just comparing writers from the 60's. You might have been, but I wasn't. Is Moore and older writer than Stan Lee? No. Older than Brubaker? Yes.I think Alan Moore is a great comic book writer. Whilst his style is developing due to the fact he still is writing today, that could be said of most writers who wrote for a period of time. My point was that modern writers often develop off of the works of the past. Moore wasn't something entirely new. He offered different direction but even he wouldn't have done so well without Stan's cheesy one liners.
To say that Moor didn't feed off earlier work and in turn the more modern stuff fed off Moore, now that's nonsense.
So then it's darn sure a good thing that I'm not saying he never found influence, isn't it? In fact, I'd say it's rosey that I happened to say the exact opposite.
It's not about influence. You can be influenced and do something original with unoriginal content. He says himself that he wasn't necessarily creating a new thing entirely, but doing new things with older templates. He did things no writer had done before, overall.
Your argument is like those Asian movie purists who say The Matrix sucks because some obscure director did slow motion gunfighting in the '70s. It doesn't take away how revolutionary that movie was by using existing ideas, and what new things it did with it.
Moore is the same. He may have been influenced by older writers, but he most certainly does not bear any antiquated hallmarks that make his work hard to read. Far from it; Watchmen is as relevant today as it was then. Stan Lee's issues of Daredevil are more stuck in time than a Republican Vietnam war veteran.
If you think otherwise, that's nonsense.
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
So then it's darn sure a good thing that I'm not saying he never found influence, isn't it? In fact, I'd say it's rosey that I happened to say the exact opposite.It's not about influence. You can be influenced and do something original with unoriginal content. He says himself that he wasn't necessarily creating a new thing entirely, but doing new things with older templates. He did things no writer had done before, overall.
Your argument is like those Asian movie purists who say The Matrix sucks because some obscure director did slow motion gunfighting in the '70s. It doesn't take away how revolutionary that movie was by using existing ideas, and what new things it did with it.
Moore is the same. He may have been influenced by older writers, but he most certainly does not bear any antiquated hallmarks that make his work hard to read. Far from it; Watchmen is as relevant today as it was then. Stan Lee's issues of Daredevil are more stuck in time than a Republican Vietnam war veteran.
If you think otherwise, that's nonsense.
-AC
Well it's a "darn sure good thing" that I never said being influenced was a bad thing! You've assumed that of me, which is untrue. When reading literature I often adopt an approach which is very similar to a new historicist approach. Therefore it's practically impossible to say that anything isn't influenced by something else! NEWSFLASH This is not necessarily a bad thing.
Also, LOL Matrix purists? And I thought us comic book nerds were sad! 😆
Of course you can be influenced and produce an entirely original piece from it! That's my point. In the same way that Moore built upon previous work to create an incredible text like Watchmen, the modern writers today have an even richer history to build upon, which now includes much of Moore's work.
I'm merely stressing the fact that Moore's work is by no means the be all and end all of comicdom. I'm emphasising that (shock horror) even in Moore's work, as good as it may be, there is room for improvement, whether that be a further of ideas, a different form of creative development etc etc.
I'm by no means undermining Moore or his work, but I certainly wouldn't put him on a pedestal when considered in context of a vast assortment of comic book writers throughout the years. If Moore stands out, he only does so with Stan Lee, Jack, Kirby, Grant Morrison and many other talented and influential writers who have contributed in a large fashion to the medium.
Originally posted by willRules
I don't normally, until I start reading something with Lobo or Daken in....then I start to worry....Also I just love the idea that like the Asian Movie purists described by AC, out there's an anti-thesis......a Matrix purist! 😂
yup, they exist.
if you don't like parts of the movie, apparently "you don't understand it!"
Originally posted by willRules
😆That's the same thing many said about Final Crisis!
This is the problem when people call BS or ignorance on others for having a different opinion. 2 seconds later they are just as guilty of the same crime!
Not referring to you, Pr, rather everyone and anyone, myself included.
the problem with Final Crisis was the stupidity of some people in showing that they actually didn't understand it.
Most of the time they're ok, though.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I never once mentioned Matrix purists.Ever.
Not just here, but in my life. Nice to know reading is still cool with you kids.
-AC
he never said you did.
Originally posted by roughrider
Do you mean Geoff Johns?Only thing I would say about him, is that his stories are really violent (maybe more than necessary), and he has no sense of humour on the page.
I have kind of a love/hate relationship with Johns.
On the one hand, when he's good, in something like "Hawkman," or Final Crisis: Legion of Three Worlds, he does something unexpected and fun. It's always going to be super continuity heavy, but that leads to new creative things. He's at his best with those "just crazy enough to work" type storylines.
On the hand, he's incredibly, incredibly blatant. Characters can't just show things, they have to outright state them so that no one can possibly miss anything. The most recent Adventure comics is a great example; I mean, it's obvious why Tim Drake is wearing the Red Robin costume. But, apparently, comics readers are so oblivious that he has to, in tears, explain to Superboy precisely why he's wearing it. Lines like "The cowl is heavy" or "It's the failed Robin's costume." That kind of thing.
It's almost a little insulting. I dont' really care for the way that Johns just wants comics to be precisely the way he liked them as a kid; Hal and Barry have to be the most important Green Lantern and Flash, for instance.
Johns writes porn for nerds. And while that sometimes leads to things I think are awesome, a great deal of the time it just makes me feel a little unsatisfied, and vaguely dirty.
People in this thread have been confusing best writers with their favorite writers.
Case in point...Dini is my favorite Batman writer. But he complete struck out with Countdown.
Morrison is a good writer with Seven Soldiers and Animal Man.....but with FC and R.I.P he took a shit.
Conclusion...Best writers don't shit themselves.
Originally posted by WickedDynamite
People in this thread have been confusing best writers with their favorite writers.Case in point...Dini is my favorite Batman writer. But he complete struck out with Countdown.
Morrison is a good writer with Seven Soldiers and Animal Man.....but with FC and R.I.P he took a shit.
Conclusion...Best writers don't shit themselves.
every writer has bad days.
Originally posted by WickedDynamite
People in this thread have been confusing best writers with their favorite writers.Case in point...Dini is my favorite Batman writer. But he complete struck out with Countdown.
Morrison is a good writer with Seven Soldiers and Animal Man.....but with FC and R.I.P he took a shit.
Conclusion...Best writers don't shit themselves.
R.I.P. is one of the greatest comics of all time.
That's not an opinion, it's an objective fact, confirmed by science and divine revelation.