Goes to show...
...that people have short memories.

I don't like how it was just recent comics. Surely there were some better examples of the worse comic of all time.

Were they even trying? Or just being reactionary in the case of some really stinky recent titles?

Who knows. I just don't see this exercise as conclusive to its original goal.

Posted by DRock1 on 2008-09-02 18:07:03
Well, Frontline #11 didn't win because it was very clearly vetoed. By me. Because I really really liked it! I felt like Civil War Frontline had been trailing off during the second half of the run, but the last issue very satisfyingly brought the lead characters to the end of their journey, showing us the viewpoint they arrived at, getting into the heads of the two Civil War leads along the way.

I guess some people just didn't like seeing their favourite heroes being humiliated by journalists.

Posted by Fetsur on 2008-09-02 18:23:09
Hey Tom,
Gotta say that for once, I disagree with you. I take your point about the level of distaste certain issues evoke as being cyclical, and can't disagree with your speculation that if you ran the same poll in 3 years time, that the result would be completely different. But, I think the reason for this is simply that, by their very nature bad issues are forgettable, and they certainly don't evoke the same amount of passion in the longer term as great stories.

I'm sure I've read some Marvel Comics over the years that make some of the winners listed above look like the lovechild of Ovid and Norman Mailer, but for the life of me, I just can't remember them.

As regards your second point, as to why Bendis, Miller, Geoff Johns et al are such hate targets, I think it's because they are writing iconic and incredibly popular characters. And each and every fan out there has his or her own idea of what the "true," essence of these icons is. And rightly or wrongly, if individual fans perceive you to be straying too far from their idea of the character, you're going to see a backlash. It's not fair. But that's just the way it is.

And on that point (and just to show my own clay feet!) the reason Loeb's Hulk is selling so well at the moment is because it's pandering to all those questions that fanboys like myself want answered. Who would win a fight between: Hulk and Rulk, Rulk and Thor, Rulk and Sentry etc (at least I think that's due up next). In the longer term it'll sail or sink on the quality of its writing/art. And for me personally, it's hovering very close to my Mendoza line!

Thanks for taking the time to do this.

Posted by cjmcaree on 2008-09-02 18:31:25
Uh-huh
Amazing Spider-man #545 is an abortion as in "any malformed or monstrous person, thing, etc." That's right. The worst occurrence in the history of Marvel comics. This was an awful decision. We can sprinkle whatever powdered sugar on this abomination of creativity, but it is still the worst move this company has made.

This informal caucus can be convoluted however anyone would like, whether this was vetoed or not, I couldn't find anywhere that it was, please correct me on this, but there is clear passion against this utter distortion and decimation of the central character of Marvel comics and there is clear passion against those who dislike how we feel about this.

As long as I have computer access and there is opportunity to comment, I will continue to protest this creatively unholy alteration in fictional history.

Publish both in '09

Posted by coolhanddave on 2008-09-02 18:34:36
I'm thinking...
that it would have been helpful if you'd limited the contest either by decade (worst comic of the 90s!) or just say, limited it to titles more than 2 years old...something to force readers away from all the current drama...

I agree with your assessment to some degree - things most recent and raw tend to stand out more. Time heals all wounds, blah blah blah. That and angry people post more ;).



Posted by onefinemess on 2008-09-02 18:48:23
Too much
Too much veto power and too much power to flag a response as offensive.

Lets offer up some restraint or have these powers taken away from us.

Eat it Republicans.

Posted by coolhanddave on 2008-09-02 19:02:20
I think it's less complicated than you are making it; these books are simply fresh in people's minds as being particularly bad. And I see no evidence of past "worst" books being rehabiliated; after all, I didn't see that many people saying US 1 or Marville were really good books after all. It's likely if something is seen as a stinker at the time, it will stay so. And I know you wouldn't make the argument that sales figures = quality in any medium.

Posted by CylverSaber on 2008-09-02 19:06:37
I heard all those comics were terrible, so I didn't read them, so I didn't vote on them? Do you people see the logic in this? Okay, think about it... Hmm. People said they sucked and/or they had Jeph Loeb's name on them and I didn't buy 'em... Can you see how this works? No...? Okay, go back to the top...

Posted by hulkspants on 2008-09-02 19:14:20
I agree...
I agree that being both old and bad is going to fade from the minds of readers faster than the good work, which we're more likely to revisit again and again. Plus you have to consider the sheer *volume* of comic books produced and with most readers following several titles you're just compounding the odds that stuff is just going to be forgotten.

Now as far as Bendis, Millar, Loeb, etc. catching a lot flack is likely a combination of factors. As you say, popularity puts books out there, thus more opinions are generated out of their work. And the internet is largely negative, we all know this. Also, writing more controversial stories with characters a large number of readers have an emotional attachment to is probably going to sell well in addition to generating strong opinions.

Loeb for example is not afraid to rock the boat, and I think that is what drives his success, Take Hulk #5 - I've seen interviews with him, he's no fool. He'd know full well the hardcore Thor fans on the net would be up in arms over this. Just as I'm sure he also knew the issue would fly off the shelves (and it did).

But even Loeb's detractors pale to the legion of Bendis haters out there, and he still sold 4 of the Top 7 books the other month. That just goes to show the more you're hated, the more you're likely to sell.

Posted by Hrungr on 2008-09-02 19:18:47
Let's put ASM #545 aside
Why?

This is clearly something that needs more discussion. If you're putting it aside now, when do you plan to put it in the forefront?

Posted by coolhanddave on 2008-09-02 19:32:38
I'd suspect that most people would say that these are "important" books. The Ultimates shares the title to some of Millar's best work. ASM #545 is a huge status quo change. Hulk is coming out of WWH... I personally don't buy into that argument, other than OMD changing ol' Spidey's life big time.


Posted by doncorswhazie on 2008-09-02 19:48:30
I think you are right on a lot of points. It is the freshness of the sour taste in the mouth that seems to be getting all the attention. But by the same token, I don't think these are cases were time will make it a good flavor. I think it's unfair to compare Dissembled and X-factor to these, those were stories with a purpose that over time made sense. Turning something that didn't make sense into making sense.
With ASM 545, CW 7, CW:FL 11, those were the end to stories that a lot of people felt were anticlimatic and lacked the payoff necessary to make a good story.
I think if this poll has proven anything it's that insult to character will always outweigh insult to quality. These people aren't just mad they got mediocre story, they are mad they got a mediocre story and their favorite characters were insulted in the process. It seems like that's made it personal for a lot of people.

Posted by Shonzi on 2008-09-02 19:52:10
Brevoort, here is my take on this and the vot
1. People were vetoing nominations in last week's latest blog when they were told not to.

2. For the convenice, and to keep the pro-BND fanatics from making rude, accusatory, and highly inappropriate remarks (such as accussing a small group of Anti-OMD/BND Spider-Man fans of making 8 additional accounts to up the vote count.) - remarks that would otherwise have resulted in Administrative action had these blatantly false/suspicious accusations had been made on the Marvel.com boards as such is considered bashing - please, please, and definitively PLEASE provide a list of comics that were vetoed as the final phase of voting goes through.

In this manner, it would have saved time, and votes would not be wasted on voting blindly. That, and it would have kept the discussions from being as... volatile as they were.

I can understand the Pro-BND fans' venomous sentiments towards that of the ANTI-BND/Anti-deal-with-Mephisto Spider-Mans in the sense that they can never seem to express their view of Spider-Man on the appropriate Spider-Man discussion threads here on Marvel.com without getting lashed out at by those of the (in lack of a more concise word) "Negative" Spider-Man fans. Which is equally as rediculous as some of the comments made by some of the Pro-BND fans.

3. Several people (at least on the internet) dislike Loeb's work (and I voted for Hulk #5 as being the worst because someone literally posted an auto-biography of Thor in every detail on one of the Hulk threads (and this person was also one of the posters who were experienced in posting information in, and maintaining the Marvel.com wiki), which clearly outlined the actions taken by Thor under Loeb's writership of Hulk #5 as being inconsistant with his character.

Others feel that Loeb's writership in general is just... terrible; I did not nominate/vote-for any other comic because I never personally read those comics such as OMD or Ultimates 3 #4 (as such, I cannot personally deliver an informed opinion on the matter).

4. The highly upset Spider-Man fans are not so much short-term thinkers (nor are the angry fans of any other title if truth be told) as alot of the Anti-BND/Anti-DWM (Dealing With Mephisto) Spider-Man fans have also shown disgust for the apparent "desecration" of Gwen Stacy in one of the older Spider-Man arcs. The disgruntled fans have also labelled the Spider-Man Clone Saga as being the worst comic arc next Spider-Man OMD's end and BND thus far.

Five and onward are simply some suggestions Brevoort, and a question that I was wondering if you'd be interested in answering via a pm to me on the Marvel.com boards (since you have the account on this site to post your blogs, you can also post on the boards... just a suggestion. :) ).

First the question: Brevoort, would you be interested in hosting a fanfic contest on the Marvel.com Fan Fiction boards (if such were within convenience to you) at some point in the future?

5. This one is kinda like the above question, only it is applied on a grander scale - A contest for fans to participate in nation wide (in U.S. ,and possibly extended internationally to all countries that also carry Marvel titles).

6. A Put-Up or Shut-up Contest for all the disgruntled fans: A contest with one design in mind, if you (the disgruntled fan) are not satisfied with how a Marvel arc, or story, or issue ended, what would have composed if you were in a respective comic writer's proverbial shoes?

All of these could implement some unique prize or something (not quite sure why Marvel has not thought of it yet, but here's some food for thoughy. ;-) ). Such as publishing an issue of a "By The Fans" comic or some such, and the fan comic would be autographed by the various Staff of Marvel, and possibly by Stan Lee himself (which I think both the former and the latter would be a really good prize to any True Believer). Or something. :)


7. Fan art contests... Much like the proposed above, only aspiring comic artists would draw a comic.

That about settles it for me Brevoort. If you are reading this post, thanks for taking the time to read this. :)

Also looking forward to seeing what you come up with for the next blog entry.

Posted by Aziroth on 2008-09-02 19:58:10
I agree that people's reaction to Hulk is out of proportion, because as soon as this story arc with Rulk ends, nobody's going to care that much in the long run that Thor got written badly in one issue. That's just my opinion, but there it is.

ASM 545 is different, because its stated intent was to make a very big change that would last indefinitely. It was deliberately written to be remembered forever. Certainly, if the reboot is undone, then 545's lasting significance will dry up, but as things currently stand, it is one of the most important issues the company has ever published. Even OMD's supporters would not deny that.

I've barely glanced at the new Ultimates, so I can't say. It does look like it has jumped the shark, and that's a shame, but I kind of doubt that #4 is bad enough to warrant the legendarily lousy status we were voting on here. I'll leaf through it the next time I'm in the comics shop and find out.

Btw... I remember US1. I only ever got to read the last issue, but I remember it being basically a very silly joke, and I don't think that's worth attacking.

I'm sure there were a lot of comics in the 90's Iron Age period that sucked mightily, but I wasn't following mainstream comics during the Gritty Period and so couldn't tell you which specific issues. I'm sure most of them did not have the lasting impact that Spidey 545 was intended to have.

Posted by bobadventures on 2008-09-02 20:14:33
P.S.
I would like to apologize for some of the comments I had made in last latest entry (the one with the final votinn phase), and I was wrong to have made several of the presumptuous comments that I had. :?


Also, Sorry guys for implying you were pulling legs about Hulk and Spidey being vetoed.



Posted by Aziroth on 2008-09-02 20:15:21
Aziroth, have you actually read any of the old Jack Kirby Thor comics? I've been reading through them recently and the properties of his hammer seem to change from issue to issue. The scenes I saw in Hulk 5 didn't particularly contradict any of that.

Posted by Fetsur on 2008-09-02 20:33:01
While I do agree that it is interesting to note that the 3 "winners" were all recent books, I think it is short-sighted to imply it has to do with a shortened attention span among the readership. To do so, I think diminishes and/or dismisses any validity to any of the comments they make. Quite frankly, Marvel's overall quality is FAR more hit-and-miss than it once was. Does this mean that all Marvel books are bad? Not at all, some books are superb. On the other hand, Marvel produces a LOT more books than ever before, and frankly the quality control on 90 or so books a month is probably a lot harder than the 30 or so from the late 80's- early 90's.

I can't comment on Ultimates #3 because I don't read the Ultimates line, so let's look at the other two.

Hulk #5 is awful, period. Just like books like the Mutant Massacre, (most) of Civil War, etc are timelessly good, these two will stink out loud for years to come. I watched "Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox" story the other day, and they made a joke about a very special episode of the '70s Incredible Hulk show where they discussed Hulk has an evil Red Twin. That was in there AS A JOKE, yet here it is now. Not only that, but he can beat up the Watcher?! He not only beat up, but dismantled the new Thor?? He choked out and defeated the same Green Hulk that single-handedly defeated the entire Marvel Universe basically? Perhaps someone can explain to anyone who has been a comic fan LONGER than 6 months why the current book isn't absurd.

ASM#545 was idiotic story-writing. I don't care what side of the debate you're on, nobody (even pro-BND'ers) thinks this issue was well-written, and the Mephisto plot device IS quite possibly the worst ever. To again mention the short attention span thing, some of the harshest critics of ASM 545 have been fans for YEARS, if not life-long fans.

I have a hard time believing that Hulk #5 would be voted worst in say 5 years, but I am supremely confident that OMD has replaced the clone as the biggest (and worst) Spider-joke of all time forever.

As for why these "bad" books are huge sellers, it's simple. ASM is the only 616 Spidey book and Rulk is the only Hulk book. One was a major event and one was a highly hyped first-time battle between two Super-Heavyweights. I could have written them onto the best-seller list. Unless I'm way off base, I imagine the majority of people who buy the book buy it for the character and the story, not the writer or the artist. I suffered through crap artwork for the first two years of Wolverine Origins before it started getting decent. Now it actually feels like it's getting somewhere. Guess what? I bought it for Wolverine and Daken, not for Dillon and Way.

One last thing (so I don't sound totally negative). I'm an original X-Factor fan, so #1 didn't bother me in the least, and Avengers: Disassembled turned from an X-fan to a Marvel fan. I buy (and enjoy) New, Mighty, and Initiative every single month. There's still a lot of quality work out every month Marvel. Fans are just starting to realize they don't have to love a book because Marvel claims it's cool.

Just my two cents....please keep up the (mostly) good work :)




Posted by insatiablesinner on 2008-09-02 20:48:38
some thoughts on why
Strange as it sounds people do buy books and watch programs they know will get their blood boiling. People also like to participate in heated debates. We see it all the time in politics, in talk radio, in 24 hour cable news channels. We all know that controversy sells.
Also, there's something to be said about the emotional attachment people form in regards to fictional (and non-fictional) story-telling. People WILL get upset if their favorite stories get changed around ("that's not how it goes!").
I believe publishers know these to be true. They know that by changing established stories they'll generate a lot of emotion, a lot of controversy -- and this translates into publicity and ultimately into sales.

Posted by Mardochaeus LXX on 2008-09-02 22:30:25
Why do I read?
I've never purchased a book based on who wrote it, or because of who was drawing, coloring, lettering, or even editing it. I started reading X-Men when I was a young teen, and I'll probably be reading it until... But it's been only recently, probably because of the internet and my taking an interest, that I've begun to notice who writes, draws, colors, etc... I've always known that I liked Joe Mad and Michael Turner's art, and that some guy named Claremont spent a long time writing the book, but that's about it.
See, it's the characters that I liked, the way they just, were... In fact one of the worst things that happens in the comic industry (in my opinion) is when comic book readers turn into adults and are capable of saying, "I just spend 2.99 just to see pictures of a person's story that wasn't very good, my imagination could have written a better story then that, I could do better..." I guess as people get older they become more critical, and begin to notice the flaws, and yearn for a way of books from their youth. Not because they were any good mind you, just because they weren't that critical of them when they were young. S'probably why I never really liked Morrison's X-Men, simply put, "this 'aint your daddy's X-Men book anymore" and I wasn't a fan of the changes, even if the storytelling was apparently amazing.
Heck, it was the cartoon that originally made me start reading, and I couldn't tell you who wrote or who the artists were on the X-Men cartoon. I could tell you these days that the cartoon was, sometimes, based on the comic book stories, but I couldn't tell you who wrote them.
I don't buy the Avengers because Bendis writes it, I'd buy Powers 'cause Bendis writes it, but the Avengers I'd buy to see Steve Rogers, Tony Stark, Hank Pym, and Jarvis do the tango around the latest Hulk-hole.
P.S. Mr. B, you do know, right, that I'm going to read the core X-Men comics whether they're any good or not, same with the Avengers, and I'd imagine the same with them Spidey-readers and their beloved thrice-monthly book (you don't know how lucky you guys are). I'm not reading them because I really want to read a book by (insert current X-writers), I'm reading them because I want to see my characters age and evolve over time. I want to see Sam Guthrie lead the X-Men one day, and if that means Cyclops and Phoenix need to go and live a normal life, that'd be fine by me. I want to see Gambit and Rogue finally hook up, I want to see Rogue learn how to control her powers. I want to see Iceman read Cat's Cradle and understand just how powerful he really can be. i want good idea's not to be putting Kitty Pryde in a bullet and blasting her into outer space. I want Mephisto to erase the last eight years or so... of X-Men continuity. Please... You guys always talk about being about to play in the greatest sandbox ever created, and I'd agree, I just wish you'd understand that its' not your sandbox, it's ours, we just appoint you folks to guard over it for a short time. Don't mess up, please...

Posted by Thomas More on 2008-09-02 23:12:27
Yeah, I think the winner should be re-named as the most popular book that happened to be bad. To me, the reason that the top three were books that sold well means that people can argue about them because they've actually been read. I mean, if a book lasts 5 or 6 issues, you have to say that something is wrong with the book and the buying audience reflects this by not giving it their dollars. Someone might have suggested any number of these books that didn't make it long enough to be more than a whisper on the comics scene but then I don't think it would have been voted for because the other fans voting for it wouldn't have known what it was about. Several of the books on the list I hadn't read let alone could I even begin to understand why they were the worst. Some of the posters who originally nominated the books did a bit of that by explaining why they thought their book was the worst but I don't think it was enough.

And all the winners also shared another thing: they apparently 'messed' with the continuity that the books had established before. Most of them were done for reasons that were meant to create excitement and it has on both sides of the issue. I'm sure that at least OMD or perhaps some of Loeb's books might be considered essential reading at some point in the future because of these pioneering pushes ahead.

Posted by mastulogan12 on 2008-09-03 00:09:02
For me (and I'm sure for a lot of others), it has nothing to do with recency. ASM #545 drove me away from 34 years of reading Spider-man's exploits. It drove me away from over 90% of the titles I was purchasing monthly from Marvel. It even disgusted my under-10 son. It took away some of the best elements of the comic and rewrote history, dumping a marriage that came to be the heart and soul of the book, because of editorial mandate. It managed to detach my connection to a beloved character and a beloved universe, so much so that I can no longer have any willingness to suspend disbelief and engage in the world of Marvel's characters...it all seems meaningless. NO OTHER BOOK IN OVER THREE DECADES HAS BEEN ABLE TO DO THAT. And, yes, there were a bunch of clunkers along the way. But nothing, absolutely nothing, tops ASM #545 in its atrociousness and negative impact.

I know you have stated that you disagree, Mr. Brevoort, and I know you say that Marvel is in this for the long haul. I really, really hope that's just smoke-and-mirrors, sales talk to cover a willingness to heed the fans. Yes, you can float the book on subscriptions and current sales, but with a 3x/month ASM schedule AND a restoration of the marriage and the timeline, you'd recapture a large portion of the alienated fans and begin to heal wounds in people who were previously loyal to the character and your books for decades...you'd be doing far better than anything you could be doing now, even with the NWtD spike in sales. Why settle for part of your audience when you can have almost all of them...why settle for floating a boat with a bunch of passengers when you can sail a luxury yacht with many more? Marvel was willing to undo the clone saga's replacement of Peter...I hope there are enough open minds there that they are willing to undo OMD and restore the marriage and timeline as they appeared in print over the years.

The vote has nothing to do with recency, at least in the case of ASM #545. The depths to which Marvel sank with that issue were timeless and unsurpassed.

Posted by jeffgamer on 2008-09-03 00:24:12
Connections with dad
Jeffgamer,

I definitely emphasize with you, particularly the connection you have with your son through comic books. A particularly special way I've bonded in my youth and even in my 20s with my father was our common interest with spider-man comics. He traded a suit case of Sgt. Fury and his howling commandos for 100 early issues of ASM.

When I was 9, he took me to buy some of my first comic books at the old location of Forbidden Planet in the Upper East Side on 59th or 60th street between 3rd adn 2nd ave. We were there when they were moving and bought every 10-cent comic book they were trying to unload before the move. The first books we bought together were ASM #345 and a web of spider-man issue I can recall the number of but it was an Art Attack issue around the first time I read a Doctor Octopus issue.

Baseball and spider-man were things my father passed on to me. Two things I hoped to pass on to my son someday. That's why I'm still here. I have hope that the editor will reconsider, what I believe the to be the greatest folly in comic book history, will fix this and allow me to link my father to my future children with the same character that I linked to my father.

Make mine for decades to come.

Posted by coolhanddave on 2008-09-03 00:36:25
To Jeffgamer
Jeff,

You have stated my sentiments exactly. I have been collecting Marvel and DC books for over 15 years. While there are many comics which I'm sure are poorly written or drawn, there has never been a book until ASM 545 which made me doubt my commitment to the medium. I actually enjoyed Clone Saga and was shocked at its revelations but it at least moved the character foward. ASM 545 shocked me to my foundations because to me it proved that I was reading comics which would never move any characters foward. Don't get me wrong, I don't want Spiderman to age; but I want every story I read to mean something. OMD displayed to me the Spiderman and the stories I read and collected could be reformed at any moment.

As comic book readers we care when something happens in our comics. We care when Captain America dies. We care when Rulk beats up Thor. The reason we care is because we feel like the stories we read will leave their mark on thier fictional characters and that we were along for the ride. OMD left me with the feeling that comics are not stories like books, but cartoon snapshots of these iconic characters.

I stand by my vote that ASM 545 is the worst ever. Not based on its writing or excellent art, but its ability to damage my love of comics. I love Marvel... please don't make huge changes in "our" characters and blame it on magic. I say "our" characters because as Dave stated above me... we grow with these characters. They are major parts of many of our imaginations and childhoods.

Dan

Posted by NinjaDan2000 on 2008-09-03 03:23:29
Celebrate the Good
Hey Tom,

While this sort of subject is interesting to a certain extent, I think we all help contribute, just a little bit, to the negativity of the internet.

I'd love to hear your take on each of the prime marvel characters, and why you think they work so well, when they work well, and perhaps your favourite stories involving those characters outside of the usual box ticking ones we always hear about (like Frank Miller's DD, for example).

Let's celebrate those things we love about Marvel for a little while.

Posted by keense on 2008-09-03 06:20:23
So....anyone up for best Marvel Comics?

Posted by dnieltjhin on 2008-09-03 07:00:27
ASM # 545 is the worst !

That only showed that fans didn´t like the direction that the story turned. The deal just to erase the marriage isn´t the most clever thing to be done. That´s good to see that is not only me that thinks that way, and ASM # 545 is the worst, alone.

Posted by claudio pahl on 2008-09-03 08:14:42
i BELIEVE IN COOLHANDDAVE.

Posted by bulgarianyogurt on 2008-09-03 08:46:52
Finished ?
Okay.
I vote for the whole 'GLA:Misassembled' mini-serie.
I'm fond of these characters since the first time I saw them in the pages of 'West Coast Avengers', and I really 'd like to know why the authors are taking this kind of suspicious pleasure upon them. I mean what you do with them, you didn't dare to do it with all your others titles : this isn't super-hero deconstructing, that's just poor jokes like a 'super-heroes for dummies' book. All the work made around the Penance character had been spoiled in an annual, just like that. Maybe you'll argue a propension of Marvel to laugh at itself, but about what are you laughing exactly ?
You tend to argue to 'haters' that if they don't like a book, then they just have to don't buy it, or selling it just after reading-whatever;I have the same for you -REALLY- if you nothing except crap to provide us or to say, then PLEASE feel free to don't do it.

That's why all the talking about how professionnal you can be made me sick :
I have nothing against a red hulk,especially in the symbolic purpose but I think two Hulks is also too much. Okay. My question is : for now , what had been told with the Red Hulk that couldn't be done with the green ? From an editorial point of view, of course.
I'm not finished.
The constantly disrespect for this and this character tend to really get on my nerves, and I'd like you to know why. I'm not for another ONBND session, I think that readers who are talking about how they discovered comics torought their parents and hope continuing the legacy to their son should grow up like everybody else. There's a time in your life, even if you had grown with comics, to realize that they aren't for you anymore, or maybe , not all of them. Thomas More made a great mistake to my opinion in his latest post, this isn't 'OUR' sandbox, not-at-all. The phenomenon we're talking about is what Jim Shooter mentioned about his run onto 'Legion of Super-Heroes' : him and the audience just growed-up together. I know that this is what is looked for with the 'Make Marvel Mine' thing ( don't ask me why ) but you have to accept that maybe Marvel doesn't really needs you especially for reader ( a little alike the 'Fight Club ' movie, 'God doesn't like you, you know ? ).I mean, even with all the new Internet possibilities, what kind of amount do you think you have onto the titles , and the sales ? If it doesn't fit you, you just have to deal with it, right ?
(...)

Posted by notapotatoe on 2008-09-03 11:11:44
What I tend to feel suspicious, talking about this or this character on the spotlight, and in which way, will re-open the good-old-polemic about non-american heroes, I'm talking about the WinterGard,I'm talking about Omega Flight.
I'm not in an infantile breakdown about what 'you have done to my favourites characters', I'd like to know who do you think you are.
Space-aliens are far well treatened.
Do the Soviet heroes always have to be portrayed as almost fascists ? Is that the way you see the Soviet Union ? Joking appart, it's interest me. I mean, from what I remember about the first Soviet Super-Soldiers who appeared in the pages of Iron Man, there were such examples of rightfulness. What's wrong with that ? Only american super-heroes are in 'the right way' ? Same for Omega Flight,as the GLA, that I tend to think that they had the 'John Byrne's creation' sickness' .
That's why I asked you what really is the 'spirit of super-hero' for you.
Are you aware of , just on the cultural aspect , the behavior of entertainment.
Wonderful movies like 'Rec' or '13 beloved' don't have a chance at all to be seen in the US if they're not properly remaked. Are you sure that you 'don't have a problem' ?
Don't you think that there are some things who are good coming from the outside ?
You had nothing more to learn ? Foreigner characters are just what we say in politics 'repoussoirs', to just valorizing the 'good' characters.
That's what you are doing now and that mean that you just didn't really evolve, and prooves that comics are ideological at first.
About the spirit of super-heroes, why don't you show the example, with opening instead or closing. Russian litterature used frequently ghosts and the devil himself as characters, as manga has a specifical way to deal with horror. All in all these are such concepts that you had in one way or another including in your stories, can't you respect that ? The fact that foreign characters can provide new points of view ? Do you know them ?

Off-topic, yes I.
I heard a lot about vetoing 'haters' but I wish there is the same for 's.ckers', because there are people who 'd like to talk about something SOMETIMES.

Posted by notapotatoe on 2008-09-03 11:34:00
To Fetsur:
While I have not read any of Jack Kirby's comics, I do know from reading both Wikipedia, and Marvel Universe database that Thor had his power levels enhanced considerably. At current, Thor's powers would allow him to take on Captain Marvel (DC), but he was defeated by Red Hulk.

As I hear it, Thor was talking throughout the fight instead of trying to defeat his opponent. As he is said to do (I have Avengers vs X-men of the 80's, and Thor was not one for being constantly chatty).

Posted by Aziroth on 2008-09-03 11:45:38
Regarding Red Hulk.
One thing Thor fans should keep in mind when looking at Hulk #5 is that the Red Hulk is a villain.

A mass-murdering villain no less.

And heroes need villains who can take them on. What were seeing right now is the classic new villain establishing himself by taking on the heroes in the opening battles. Eventually the tables will turn and I'm sure both the real Hulk and Thor will eventually get their revenge. That's just how it goes.

Thor fans see the word "Hulk" in his name and that's really the problem they have with it. If it was Mangog or some other new and completely unrelated villain, you wouldn't see a *fraction* of the fuss we're seeing over this now.

Posted by Hrungr on 2008-09-03 13:15:41
Frontline #11 got vetoed early
The problem in these votes is you let one person's veto have more weight than the entire community. That works in government where a 2/3 majority can overturn it but not in your blog. Noone's forgotten how bad a character Sally Floyd is. Put "In this issue Sally Floyd dies" on the cover of your worst selling title and I guarentee you'll get a nice sales bump.

Posted by izzatrix on 2008-09-03 13:26:43
That doesn't really show much
Frankly not enough people voted for this to be indicative of anything other than the opinions of a very few marvel.com posters. Now while I agree that ASM 545 is probably the worst comic I've ever read, and has me off Spider-Man entirely until ASM 666 when sales force marvel to undo the mess, I'd say the wizard poll in 204 is a better measuring stick, more open and more votes. The red hulk thing will go away, people are just peeved that Loeb doesn't seem to regard anything previous worthy of attention and that upsets some people. Bendis and Millar have the same issue, the price of being a star if you will (people don't say no enough, or make you really work on the story). ASM 545 isn't that, it will stick in people's craw as the day Peter Parker liferaped his aunt against her will, mystically aborted children and showed far less intelligence than Johnny Blaze and far less responsibility than I could imagine. That comic is going to stick as some of the worst writing and plotting of all time. Right up there with SuperBoyPrime punching holes in the verse and Ben Reilly being the real Spider-Man while Peter Parker the clone slaps his wife around.

Posted by moral_d on 2008-09-03 13:32:33
Well...
I don't know what other fans are doing, but I vote with my dollar. Didn't like the change in Bendis' Avengers, dropped the title. Didn't like the change in the X-Men, dropped the titles. It's the best I can do. I really don't see how bitching online helps, but then the titles still sell well regardless if I buy or not. Shrug

Posted by ex_mutants on 2008-09-03 15:09:42
Gunther is a tool
We're not gonna protest!We're not gonna protest!We're not gonna protest!We're not gonna protest!We're not gonna protest!We're not gonna protest!We're not gonna protest!We're not gonna protest!We're not gonna protest!We're not gonna protest!We're not gonna protest!We're not gonna protest!We're not gonna protest!We're not gonna protest!We're not gonna protest!We're not gonna protest!We're not gonna protest!We're not gonna protest!We're not gonna protest!We're not gonna protest!We're not gonna protest!We're not gonna protest!We're not gonna protest!

Posted by coolhanddave on 2008-09-03 15:20:57
Nostalgia
I think that we are voting new stories, since the stories that we read during childhood constitute the foundation of our preferences. If you started reading X-Men after Dark Phoenix Saga, chances are that you would see such story as part of the MU status quo, and that you read it because you knew how important it was, not challenging its value as a story per se.

A friend pointed out a letter published on Uncanny X-men, right after Giant Size Xmen 1 appeared, and the writer said something like “I cannot believe what you did to the X-Men. I will never read this book again”. Go figure.


Posted by freyes2000 on 2008-09-03 15:47:20
did no one read US1?
I feel people did not take the time to really think about the question. What was the worst ever? Was the art poor in Hulk#5, does BND not make any sense at all? People seem short sighted and only voted for what they didnt like at the time, not the worst book Marvel has ever published, have you even heard of the Sleepwalker? I think the more interesting question would be what book do you buy but just never get around to reading? How long will you by a bad book just because it has the Avengers or X-men in the title?

Posted by jaffy on 2008-09-03 16:13:02
Hey!

I liked Sleepwalker...

Posted by Michael Heide on 2008-09-03 18:54:03
hmm late response to worst comic ever
this isnt the worst comic ever, but stop hyping kick @!@!@!* so much. i understand that its gory and involves mature subject matter, i mean i really really really really do enjoy this comic, but i feel the description "miss out and youre an idiot" should really be used sparingly because it sets the series up on too high of a pedestal.

Posted by mikedumapias on 2008-09-03 23:42:36
RE: Gunther is a tool
hey dude, ...sorry,,,hey dave,
you remind me my latest bulletproof vest...
AMAZING !

Posted by notapotatoe on 2008-09-04 03:07:10
Bah
Obviously in a popular vote, people are going to vote for something they read. How many people online read US 1? That comic is from 1980!!! Personally I love ASM 545 and Hulk 5 just as many others but I don't feel any reason why to defend it, it's popular and selling well. Why would I bother campaigning for it? I never liked Ultimates by Millar so I couldn't be outraged by Loeb's but I just didn't read it.

Posted by leoparis on 2008-09-04 03:27:11
One reason people voted for three current comics is that they hope to influence them to change for the better. A vote for a twenty-year old book like Secret Wars II (a title which probably should have at least been nominated) would not change anything in the present.

But I stand by my vote for OMD. Two of my least favorite things in comics are the faustian character Spawn and the history-erasing Crisis on Infinite Earths. OMD encompasses both.

Posted by bobadventures on 2008-09-05 04:09:06
I already posted this, but I don't see the post. Maybe it didn't go through properly, or maybe somebody flagged it for some reason. Anyway...

The reason people voted for current titles is that they hope they can still influence those titles to change their storylines for the better. A vote for a twenty year old title like Secret Wars II (which really should have at least been nominated, as it sucked like a hull breach) can't affect much in the present day.

But I stand by my vote for OMD. Two of the things I most dislike in the comics world are the history-erasing Crisis on Infinite Earths, and the faustian character Spawn. OMD combines both.

Posted by bobadventures on 2008-09-05 18:09:08
I can not get enough of this question, what is the worst ever? I have read a lot of comics in my lifetime so good, so great and some I can not believe how bad they are today. Looking through my collection I see a lot and I mean a lot of bad bad books. Some started out great like Sleepwalker and turned to trash others seem just tossed together to sell such as the Ghost Rider/Cable oneshot. The question that has been missed is what makes a bad comic? Yes poor art and poor writing. Why was the art and writing poor? SWII sounded like a good idea but looking at it again it seems so so rushed. Is it poor quality and how it that judged? Some of Stan and Jack's work was always "War and Peace", the made some bad books too, be honest they would not stand up in todays market, Is it the art? Why does some art just stink? Is the artist new or is he/she under a deadline. And what about the writing? How much is just tossing hero "A" and villian "B" against each other. Is there a plot, is the writer telling use something or is it just throw something with xmen in the market place to sell. Wow thank you Tom for a great idea, worst comic ever. And if anyone wants to read US1 I have it bagged and boarded in my collection. God please I have to get rid of them, I only have so much space, the full run of Rome takes have a box. Thank you all

Posted by jaffy on 2008-09-06 02:15:29