The Big Picture: Done With Dark

[GiantRaven]

To me, adults who identify with these comic book heroes are clinging on to old childhood fantasies - hence man-children.

Why is it not possible for comic book fans (or, more specifically, superhero comic fans) to just enjoy the stories because...they're fun stories? Why do they have to be labelled with something that sounds so overtly condescending simply because they like a product commonly perceived to be for children? Seeing as you admit you have never read a superhero comic, you really shouldn't be commenting on what you believe them to contain. If you had read a multitude of superhero comics, you would see the variety of stories and themes that far surpass the idea of child power fantasy.

 

[OtherSideofSky]

I definitely agree with this. Anyone who thinks that plastering sex and violence all over something makes it mature is so juvenile and ignorant I feel embarrassed to be a member of the same species as them. It's that kind of idiocy that turned me off to mainstream American superhero comics as a kid in the nineties and early 2000s and caused me to turn to Kamen Rider for my stories of superheroes in outlandish, brightly colored suits fighting monsters.

If Thor really is just about an awesome space viking fighting monsters with a hammer I will cry tears of joy.

I couldn't really think of any other way to put it. If i'm owning up to having done something that is also something man-children do, i'd have thought i'd be ripping on myself just as much or at least creating a level ground with everyone else - clearly not. I wasn't intending to make a derogatory statement, or rather, it wasn't the point of using that phrase. I'm afraid i just can't think of a nicer term for it. But if you can, feel free to suggest one. I just feel the comparison between pokemon and comic book heroes is there, and we all know pokemon are pretty much for man-children (for those who aren't of the younger demographic), and so comic book heroes carry over that same aspect of the comparison in my head, especially when you consider comic book heroes really played on both the imagination of younger audiences, the escapism from mundane school life, and the fact nothing really bad happened to them. There might be a few "ooh, aaah" moments, but at the end of the day you always knew the hero was going to beat the baddies and save the day. Otherwise there'd be no hero and no comic. To me, adults who identify with these comic book heroes are clinging on to old childhood fantasies - hence man-children. But that does not have to be a negative connotation. It's negative because you believe it to be. I know people who are self-proclaimed proud man-children, just like you have those who are proud to be geeks, and dare i say, proud to be gamers. Grown men who play pokemon into their 30s will look you in the eye like a boss while they finish catching a pokemon and say with all seriousness that yes, they do want to catch 'em all and couldn't give a toss what others think about their hobbies or labelling them as man-children.

No. It's negative because it has a negative connotation in society. It suggests the failure to become something (an adult). Comics are not like Pokemon: They're an entire medium, not just one series of games, and they encompass all genres and demographics. When you label an entire medium as "for children" you're making a value judgment, labeling it as something beneath the notice of a mature individual. This is the same kind of thinking that led to science fiction being ignored for decades by serious readers and critic. Yeah, sometimes I read and watch things made for eight year olds when I want to unwind, and sometimes I find some really interesting ideas and characters buried in them. I also read the essays of Lu Xun and the later, autobiographical fiction of Akutagawa in their original languages and write about the implications of postwar Japanese film. When I get together with friends we sometimes talk about Batman or old kungfu movies, but just as often we talk about philosophy and classical art. Am I somehow not fully an adult just because I happen to read the occasional comic book? If so, shouldn't the same be said about all the people watching the equally ridiculous but far more acceptable weekly TV shows about doctors and lawyers and detectives that draw such high ratings every week? Where exactly is your imaginary line of adulthood drawn?

 

[Axolotl]

After surveying the mess he have wrought with Watchmen in the 90's, Alan Moore decides he had enough of the GrimDark in comics, and answers back with the more positive Tom Strong, an old-school throwback to the HappyFun superhero stories of yore, only this time with modern twists on that.

Then he made a comic reinterpreting childldren's fairytales as peadophilia, so it's not like he totally rid himself of making grimdark stuff.

But the 90's trends weren't that bad, sure most of it sucked alot but we got Sandman so it wasn't all bad.

Lost Girls was not a grimdark comic. It's about the joy of sexual liberation and freedom, in everything from the art to the symbolism. That is not a grimdark idea.

How about the League then where one of the main characters gets brutally raped to death? Or even From Hell which is apprantly so horrifying a description of it caused Neil Gaiman to be sick?

 

[LordLundar]

Wasn't Incredible Hulk always about impulse-control issues? I don't know much about the comics, but he's always been "Monstrous Anger Man", hasn't he?

Originally Hulk was actually pretty intelligent and capable of rational thought. That's been rebooted recently with Avengers: Earth's Mightiest Heroes where he's a lot more rounded out of a character and not just "Hulk SMASH!!!" all the time. In fact, he spends most of his time as Hulk and can turn it on or off at will.

Really? I guess I didn't know what I was talking about. Thinking for a second, I realize my familiarity with the Hulk mostly comes from watching re-runs of the live-action TV series.

That series does present an example of a comic-book character being kind of dark before the grimdark '80s, although while Banner seemed to consider the Hulk a curse, whenever he did turn into it it only ever throw bad guys around, stare at bystanders for a few moments, and then jog away.

Yeah, I really recommend A: EMH to any Avengers fan. It's a solid example of how a cartoon can be relatively mature without having to resort to what can be regarded as "dark and gritty".

Hulk's background in the cartoon is about him trying to be considered a hero as opposed to a monster.

 

[RyePunk]

I'll agree with Spawn being a wretched creation that seems to have been motivated by the marketing before anything else. But Sandman, Starman, JLA, JSA (the 1999 reboot)

Also Secret Six anyone? Dark and gritty but not actually, but sometimes yea. Seriously, best ongoing super"hero" comic. Just read it.

 

[CrazyGirl17]

While I admit to liking the occasionaly grim n' gritty story (preferably a deconstruction of a particular topic)... I really don't care much for the grimdark comics of the 90's.

I am an adult who still loves her comics (that's right, I said she, there are female comic book fans out there, ya know), but it bothers me that the comic writers of the time, instead of looking at the deeper subject matter of comics like "Watchmen" and "The Dark Knight Returns", focused instead on the surface stuff. You know, sex and blood and guns and stuff like that.

And while I think the sooner we drop the "comics/cartoons/video games are for kids" belief, the better, I do have my limits.

Now if you excuse me, I'm going to wait for the Thor movie to come out.

 

[Gralian]

To me, adults who identify with these comic book heroes are clinging on to old childhood fantasies - hence man-children.

Why is it not possible for comic book fans (or, more specifically, superhero comic fans) to just enjoy the stories because...they're fun stories? Why do they have to be labelled with something that sounds so overtly condescending simply because they like a product commonly perceived to be for children? Seeing as you admit you have never read a superhero comic, you really shouldn't be commenting on what you believe them to contain. If you had read a multitude of superhero comics, you would see the variety of stories and themes that far surpass the idea of child power fantasy.

Simply because the focus is on the superhero, not the story. The character, not the backdrop, not the lore, not the supporting cast, not the stories themselves. Everything is about glorifying and marketing the superhero. What's the first thing you generally see on the front cover when you first see a comic book? The superhero. The superhero is the focal point, the superhero is representative of those power fantasies, which is highlighted even further by the brightly coloured spandex - something that would be appeal to children. I would imagine the hero on the front cover would be depicted heroically, as well. The spandex covers the fantasy element. (It's breaking from societal conventional norms to wear attire like that, hence why they it works as an "alter ego) It works as a power element. Even if the hero is not doing anything particularly heroic on that front page, they will still look heroic, even if it's something simple like just having muscles. Combining the two, we have power fantasy, which is why it's associated with children and 'child power fantasy'. That's just my take on it anyway.

I think part of the problem is that comic books and comic book heroes just haven't grown up, which they tried to do during the 90's from what Bob was saying, but it didn't go so well. Instead, it became angsty, depressive and dull while somewhat suffering an identity crisis. I honestly feel that if the comic book industry wanted the stories to be mature, the heroes and villains would have to change as well. Out with the tacky spandex; in with a flash suit, or something to that effect. I never saw the show Heroes, but from the odd trailer i did see it seemed to pull off the whole superhero thing in a very believable way. No silly spandex, not ridiculous scenarios, all while keeping 'mature' stories that were supposedly very engaging. I think if comic books took the "Heroes" approach to telling their stories and portraying their characters, the comic book industry would shake off the 'man-children' connotation in quick time.

 

[Jenx]

The main problem with adding GRIMDARK up the bum to an already existing franchise is that...well that's what you're doing. You're just tacking it on, and it feels tacked on.

Stuff that's dark and gritty from the get go and was intended to be such can sometimes work a lot better. (Then again, Spawn quite honestly sucked pass the initial WOW! factor when you saw it as a kid, so maybe I'm wrong, I dunno.)

I think part of the problem is that comic books and comic book heroes just haven't grown up, which they tried to do during the 90's from what Bob was saying, but it didn't go so well. Instead, it became angsty, depressive and dull while somewhat suffering an identity crisis. I honestly feel that if the comic book industry wanted the stories to be mature, the heroes and villains would have to change as well.

Yeah, if only there were people making comic books outside of the United States, like that weird place they call "Europe".

 

[GiantRaven]

Snip

Once again I will state, perhaps you should actually read a variety of superhero comics before making your grand sweeping assumptions. Perhaps you might actually see they aren't all how you describe them, although I will say that some are but they tend to be the ones that aren't actually very good.

Also Secret Six anyone? Dark and gritty but not actually, but sometimes yea. Seriously, best ongoing super"hero" comic. Just read it.

Secret Six is fantastic. I would recommend anybody picking it up and reading it.

While I admit to liking the occasionaly grim n' gritty story (preferably a deconstruction of a particular topic)... I really don't care much for the grimdark comics of the 90's.

Have you read the 90s Green Arrow? I loved that, in the midst of books that featured characters trying to be as extreme as possible, it starred a mild-mannered vegetarian monk.

 

[Gralian]

Snip

Once again I will state, perhaps you should actually read a variety of superhero comics before making your grand sweeping assumptions. Perhaps you might actually see they aren't all how you describe them, although I will say that some are but they tend to be the ones that aren't actually very good.

I'm glad you can concede to some degree on what i'm trying to say, though to ask someone to suddenly swell with the knowledge of someone 'in the know' is a bit extraneous. If the outside observer instantly jumps to those grand sweeping assumptions it's the fault of the thing being generalised, not the observer. It's like saying not all of Nintendo's games or products are for kids or mums / girlfriends, and yet it's what most people will say who aren't gamers or Nintendo fans. Which is a result of the marketing. Not the person making the generalisation. A quick google image of the words "comic book" shows covers with bright colours, cartoony visuals, and outlandish characters. This is the marketing of comic books and thusly it is this that the generalisations are based upon, and therefore the fault of the marketing for the way it is stylised.

No comment on my bit about the show "Heroes"? As i said, i've never seen it, but i'm really curious to know how a comic book / superhero fan would react to that show. Whether they think it's a better, more mature way of telling a superhero story, or whether it needs the old campiness of pre-90's comics. (Another assumption to say it was camp, but that's the opposite of gritty, which is what i'm told the 90's was all about)

 

[TWEWER]

I agree with you 100%, Bob. The so-called gritty and realistic trappings of modern superhero comics are part of the reason why I tend to stick to manga. I kind of ignored the Thor movie when I first heard about it, but after hearing this I might just go check it out.

 

[GiantRaven]

No comment on my bit about the show "Heroes"? As i said, i've never seen it, but i'm really curious to know how a comic book / superhero fan would react to that show. Whether they think it's a better, more mature way of telling a superhero story, or whether it needs the old campiness of pre-90's comics. (Another assumption to say it was camp, but that's the opposite of gritty, which is what i'm told the 90's was all about)

I enjoyed what I saw of Heroes. I don't think all superhero comics being written that way would be a good move though. I'd miss their complete silliness.

 

[beema]

mostly in agreement on this one
good one bobby

 

[Blayze2k]

In a world...
Where the defeated...
Stay down...
One man...
Had the courage...
To rise again...

WEEBLES.
Coming to a theater near you.

[You're absolutely right, Bob.]

 

[ironlordthemad]

Has anyone else noticed that the Space Viking with a Magical Hammer, is YOUR space viking with a magical hammer, not today's 7 year old's Space Viking with a Magical Hammer?
Just like the guy in a bat themed suit was your guy in a bat themed suit, not today's youth's guy in a bat themed suit. Although we all love him now.
Just like the guy in a robot themed suit was your guy in a robot themed suit, not today's youth's guy in a robot themed suit. Although we all love him now.
Or is it just me?
I think this is as close to an apology as we will ever get from movie bob as he actually says that the comic book industry was revitalised by people like him supporting the "gritty and dark" era of comics that brought them back to life. But then he has to go and ruin it by trying to moan and ***** about a situation that he and thousands of others like him set into motion.
Kind of makes this whole video pointless...

 

[moosek]

I take my coffee any shade I want. If my dark stories are dark, and my light stories and light, and some light stories have dark tones, and some... whatever. The middle ground can between dark/serious and lighthearted can get a little disturbing; mainly because many people don't understand that the lighter side isn't exclusive to kids.

I liked Tron: Legacy, and it subverted many actual acts of violence to get a PG rating. But in some ways the faux violence inflicted on the programs in Tron is more off putting than actual violence. The argument could be made that even in the context of its own story, the programs are just lines of code, but the Grid makes them sentient beings who ultimately fear being reduced to a pile of legos. That point is reinforced when we see a woman(program) weeping with a handful of legos that used to be her companion(program).

This is just an interesting debate me and my friends had about the darker element of Tron.

 

[EchetusXe]

Now I want to see Thor lol.

 

[John the Gamer]

I watched Watchmen, and it was deep indeed. Also it was awesome. I liked all the ... stuff that was in it. Yeah... Thor seems awesome.

 

[Luthir Fontaine]

I dont know bob...Batman and Robin didnt take it self serious and it sucked

 

[Littaly]

Well, everything can stand being a little less all-consuming ^^

Stagnation is never good, regardless of what it is the industry obsesses over. And that was a much less whiny episode than I thought it would be..