About Those 70s Comics

[SpikePrime]

There's an issue I'm having trying to get into some of the comics from SFDebris' ongoing comic book retrospectives, and I wonder if others have the same issue;

Context:
From Here to Infinity is easily my favourite project Chuck is producing, I'm finding that journey so fascinating. Likewise, I am immensely enjoying all of those comic history retrospectives, especially Incredible and Immortal (The Hulk).

So I decided to start reading some of those old comics, starting with Iron Man #55 (first Thanos appearance), and Mike Fredrich's and Jim Starlin's 1970s run on Captain Marvel.

Problem:
The trouble came in the fact I cannot stand the way they are written. The dialogue and narration are, to be blunt, quite bad. Every character melodramatically declares their intention, random exposition gets blurted out at inappropriate times, and often it feels like the dialogue is written with the worry that we won't know what's happening unless the writer exposits every single action in excruciating detail.

Now, I am well aware that comic book dialogue often isn't true to how people actually talk, even in modern comics there can be some pretty hokey dialogue at times. As a life-long comic fan I accept this. I adore, for instance, JMS's Thor run and Chris Claremont's X-Men despite these issues. But with so much stuff from the 60s and 70s especially, the way characters were written seemed to be especially bizarre and clumsy.

Admittedly, I have the biggest issues with Mike Friedrich's writing on Captain Marvel (Starlin did the art there), and I know Starlin gets a LOT better later. I adore his 80s and 90s comics, but like so much else written in the Silver/Bronze age, my eyes just slide off the page and I cannot get into the story. After too much of that old style of writing, despite the fact I really want to get into the story, it's so frustrating trying to get through so much of this stuff that my brain just gives up and I have to drop the book and move on to something else.

So, I ask, does anyone else get this kinda issue of impatience with older comics, pre-1980s? How do you get through these comics and still appreciate the story they were trying to tell?

[clearspira]

There's an issue I'm having trying to get into some of the comics from SFDebris' ongoing comic book retrospectives, and I wonder if others have the same issue;

Context:
From Here to Infinity is easily my favourite project Chuck is producing, I'm finding that journey so fascinating. Likewise, I am immensely enjoying all of those comic history retrospectives, especially Incredible and Immortal (The Hulk).

So I decided to start reading some of those old comics, starting with Iron Man #55 (first Thanos appearance), and Mike Fredrich's and Jim Starlin's 1970s run on Captain Marvel.

Problem:
The trouble came in the fact I cannot stand the way they are written. The dialogue and narration are, to be blunt, quite bad. Every character melodramatically declares their intention, random exposition gets blurted out at inappropriate times, and often it feels like the dialogue is written with the worry that we won't know what's happening unless the writer exposits every single action in excruciating detail.

Now, I am well aware that comic book dialogue often isn't true to how people actually talk, even in modern comics there can be some pretty hokey dialogue at times. As a life-long comic fan I accept this. I adore, for instance, JMS's Thor run and Chris Claremont's X-Men despite these issues. But with so much stuff from the 60s and 70s especially, the way characters were written seemed to be especially bizarre and clumsy.

Admittedly, I have the biggest issues with Mike Friedrich's writing on Captain Marvel (Starlin did the art there), and I know Starlin gets a LOT better later. I adore his 80s and 90s comics, but like so much else written in the Silver/Bronze age, my eyes just slide off the page and I cannot get into the story. After too much of that old style of writing, despite the fact I really want to get into the story, it's so frustrating trying to get through so much of this stuff that my brain just gives up and I have to drop the book and move on to something else.

So, I ask, does anyone else get this kinda issue of impatience with older comics, pre-1980s? How do you get through these comics and still appreciate the story they were trying to tell?

I know exactly what you mean but I would go as far as to say that this lasted until the early 1990s.

There are a lot of old comics on Amazon available for your e-reader of choice and recently I decided to check out the Justice League 1987-1996 run and, hoo boy, that is some tough going stuff. The language is clunky, cheesy and simplistic in equal measure. You really do find yourself glossing over a lot of it. Too many B and C list characters in the main team too.

Honestly, the 1997-2006 JLA run is just so much more complex and interesting, even if it is needlessly dark at times.

Sorry to make this a review on Justice League, but it is my most recent experience with old comics. I'm not suprised that comics used to have such a terrible reputation among the general public tbh.

[McAvoy]

I am aware of what you are talking about. It is just the way they wrote comics back then. Maybe you could call it unsophisticated and perhaps even aimed at for kids than adults.

I don't have a problem with it honestly and it's perhaps because I read those same comics as a kid. Those comics were my own father's collection which was then added by my own.

Its just part of the package which is comics back then. The artwork, character designs, explanations or lack of explanations for things, the past history of characters or motivations of villains and so forth.

I was a huge Iron Man fan way before MCU. The explanation of how Iron Man's armor works, it's technology is laughably bad. It's design resembled like most comicbook superheroes except it's made of 'metal' that is somehow rigid but flexible due to... Magnets. Superthin weapons Stark puts into the armor to counter the villain of the month is amusing. Of course the entire time, Stark is describing these things and what he does. This latest and greatest gadget he has. The worse one is designing a face with a nose for reasons.

It is what it is. It's like having kids try to watch a movie with heavy practical effects but with obvious limitations and not being able to get into the movie because of it. Whereas the rest of us who grew up watching movies where CGI was used sparingly if at all, we don't mind this at all. Part of the charm of the movie.

[Nobody700]

Don't forget this is the Marvel Method, the writer wants to explain EVERY SINGLE DETAIL, even if the art shows it. Iron Man must tell you he's picking up a glass of water and drinking it, and tell you WHY he is.

Stan left a long impact on Marvel, and a lot of writers had to copy him. Stay in house for a reason.

[McAvoy]

Don't forget this is the Marvel Method, the writer wants to explain EVERY SINGLE DETAIL, even if the art shows it. Iron Man must tell you he's picking up a glass of water and drinking it, and tell you WHY he is.

Stan left a long impact on Marvel, and a lot of writers had to copy him. Stay in house for a reason.

This actually worked out in Iron Man's favor back in the 80's. During Stark's time in alcoholism. You saw his reasoning behind everytime he took up a glass. Like you pointed out, the reason why he drank a non-alcoholic drink afterwards.