The Comics Lore Unpopular Opinion Thread 2 2

[Ken Aldred]

On 9/14/2023 at 3:30 PM, Kramerica said:

4. Black Sabbath was better with Ronnie James Dio than Ozzy Osbourne. Osbourne is a hack who - along with his Witch Wife - has taken credit and basically stolen all of the contributions of everyone associated with his solo career.

 

Ozzy had a perfect tone for what was proto doom metal, but everything that's been said about the way he treated his musicians has soured my opinion as well. Dio's vocal range and power absolutely crushes him.

[Happy Noodle Boy]

On 9/14/2023 at 6:00 PM, Ken Aldred said:

Kirby is the most metal comic book writer of all time.

Here's an example of his genius...

"In the context of destruction, Orion transcends the term !

To oppose him is to die ! To survive him is life lived in fragmented form !"

Brilliant.

I think that's a perfect example of everything wrong with Kirby's dialogue, but different strokes for different folks...

[Kramerica]

On 9/14/2023 at 11:24 AM, HouseofComics.Com said:

Whoa, some big swings there!

True. But they are HONEST swings that I truly believe in. Especially regarding Flat Earthers.

[ADAMANTIUM]

[Ken Aldred]

On 9/15/2023 at 2:44 AM, Mark Warren said:

I think that's a perfect example of everything wrong with Kirby's dialogue, but different strokes for different folks...

Sometimes I like not taking my comics too seriously, and that's easy with Kirby's writing.

[Ken Aldred]

On 9/14/2023 at 3:30 PM, Kramerica said:

The 66 issue Suicide Squad run written by John Ostrander is the best series ever released by DC Comics. The Justice League by Giffen, DeMatteis and Maguire is a close runner up.

I preferred Ostrander's Spectre run, but Suicide Squad was good.

 

[davidpg]

On 9/14/2023 at 10:30 AM, Kramerica said:

10. Grant Morrison's X-Men run was terrible and boring.

This run rejuvenated my (since 1982!) interest in the X-Men!  I haven't revisited it in years though...I'll reread that run and see if it holds up.  And I LOVED the art actually.

[MisterMR]

Kraven’s last hunt is not a good story. It’s exhausting and repetitive and pretentious. 

[ConcreteMob181]

Unpopular opinions you say? I’ve got a few.

1. Matt Fraction’s Hawkeye and Tom King’s Vision are overrated. 

2. Brian Azzarello’s Wonder Woman was the best New 52 series.

3. Brian Wood is not a good writer. 

4. Alan Moore’s Swamp Thing is the greatest comic run of all time.

5. The Long Halloween is a a top 3 Batman run.

[Ken Aldred]

On 9/16/2023 at 3:30 PM, ConcreteMob181 said:

5. The Long Halloween is a a top 3 Batman run.

I've never really liked any of Loeb and Sale's Batman mini-series. Or, Superman For All Seasons.

[shadroch]

On 9/14/2023 at 6:44 PM, Mark Warren said:

I think that's a perfect example of everything wrong with Kirby's dialogue, but different strokes for different folks...

Those were meant to be side notes for a writer.  Think about what Stan could have translated it into.

[Shadow]

On 9/12/2023 at 9:43 AM, AJD said:

CGC should do away with 9.2, 9.4, 9.6 and 9.8 grades. Anything currently 9.2 becomes 9.0, while 9.4 and 9.6 become 9.5. All 9.8 and higher are 10.0

(I know that's really not in their interest, so it will never happen.)

I think this is pretty interesting. There are no 8.2's etc. Some of the differences between the .2's is very hard to find IMO. But what do I know...

[Gonzimodo]

On 9/16/2023 at 10:40 AM, Ken Aldred said:

I've never really liked any of Loeb and Sale's Batman mini-series. Or, Superman For All Seasons.

My unpopular opinion was going to be that all of Loeb's Batman work, especially The Long Halloween and Hush, is overrated garbage. I just don't understand why so many people seem to love those two stories in particular.  

[Ken Aldred]

On 9/18/2023 at 4:25 PM, Gonzimodo said:

My unpopular opinion was going to be that all of Loeb's Batman work, especially The Long Halloween and Hush, is overrated garbage. I just don't understand why so many people seem to love those two stories in particular.  

I recall the British comics news magazine here, Comics International, going on about how amazing the Superman For All Seasons mini-series was, giving it top reviews. When I read it I thought it was okay, nothing more.  Same as the Batman material.

[Ken Aldred]

Currently reading the Promethea series by Alan Moore for the first time.

If you enjoy wading through dense exposition about tarot cards and levels of creation, an entire issue of the mysticism of tantric sex, and lots more interminable, pretentious metaphysics, then you'll enjoy it. 

I was thinking about breaking up the experience with some weeding in the garden, but I think I'll watch the grass growing there instead as a more fascinating interlude in between issues.

[Gonzimodo]

On 9/19/2023 at 12:07 PM, Ken Aldred said:

Currently reading the Promethea series by Alan Moore for the first time.

If you enjoy wading through dense exposition about tarot cards and levels of creation, an entire issue of the mysticism of tantric sex, and lots more interminable, pretentious metaphysics, then you'll enjoy it. 

I was thinking about breaking up the experience with some weeding in the garden, but I think I'll watch the grass growing there instead as a more fascinating interlude in between issues.

Promethea can be a pretty tough read.  I remember there being some good stuff among all the magical navel gazing, but I haven't read it since it came out or had an overwhelming urge to revisit it.  That ABC Comics line was a lot of fun at the time, though. 

[MAR1979]

On 9/13/2023 at 10:19 AM, valiantman said:

I'm not sure if this is an unpopular opinion or just one that most people have never thought about...

The average grade for surviving raw (and graded) comic books from 1933 to 1999 is nearly always the year divided by 10 (or lower).

Surviving comics from 1938 always average 3.8 or lower. Surviving comics from 1965 always average 6.5 or lower.  Surviving comics from 1979 are always 7.9 or lower. Surviving comics from 1992 always average 9.2 or lower.

It doesn't seem like that would be true because calculated CGC averages are often higher, but CGC grading is only done with copies "worth sending to CGC"... not every surviving copy.

Generally speaking, if you want an above average book in your collection, just get one that's higher grade than the year.  (Higher than 3.8 for 1938, higher than 6.5 for 1965, higher than 9.2 for 1992, etc.)

Except on outliers a 9.4 on a 1992 book is pointless for ROI. perhaps even 9.6 as well. But yeah the math is fine for X axis but Y needs to be pointed to desirability Beyond me though on how to arrive at that number

[MAR1979]

On 9/14/2023 at 1:23 AM, HouseofComics.Com said:

This thread is really good!

My unpopular take is that Frank Robbins did a good job on Invaders. Somehow his art fits there. (I hate his Batman.)

his Invaders is nice for those for those that prefer their heroes too look as if in middle off heroin withdrawal.

[shadroch]

On 9/19/2023 at 9:42 AM, MAR1979 said:

his Invaders is nice for those for those that prefer their heroes too look as if in middle off heroin withdrawal.

Thank the Lord they didn't give him the X-Men instead of the Invaders. I don't think this forum would even  exist.

[valiantman]

On 9/19/2023 at 11:38 AM, MAR1979 said:

On 9/13/2023 at 9:19 AM, valiantman said:

I'm not sure if this is an unpopular opinion or just one that most people have never thought about...

The average grade for surviving raw (and graded) comic books from 1933 to 1999 is nearly always the year divided by 10 (or lower).

Surviving comics from 1938 always average 3.8 or lower. Surviving comics from 1965 always average 6.5 or lower.  Surviving comics from 1979 are always 7.9 or lower. Surviving comics from 1992 always average 9.2 or lower.

It doesn't seem like that would be true because calculated CGC averages are often higher, but CGC grading is only done with copies "worth sending to CGC"... not every surviving copy.

Generally speaking, if you want an above average book in your collection, just get one that's higher grade than the year.  (Higher than 3.8 for 1938, higher than 6.5 for 1965, higher than 9.2 for 1992, etc.)

Except on outliers a 9.4 on a 1992 book is pointless for ROI. perhaps even 9.6 as well. But yeah the math is fine for X axis but Y needs to be pointed to desirability Beyond me though on how to arrive at that number

You'll need to want the book for your collection first. 

Nothing in what I posted is about ROI.