Favorite Publisher

G

Greatness

World Changer
Joined
Jun 2, 2005
Messages
41
As a comic fan I personally dont favor one comic publisher over another, however I know quite a few people who wont buy into DC because they grew up on marvel or vice versa. What does everyone here read?

Personally I read any that have a good story too them like;

DC Comics
Wildstorm (I believe under DC but almost like a different publisher): Love the authority, majestic, Wildcats, and Planetary.
Mainstream: All your superman, batman, flash and so on.

Marvel Comics,
Max Comics (Marvel but a different line more or less): Punisher (He needed an adult line), Supreame Power (one of the best comics out right now.
Mainstream: Some Xmen, Spiderman, IronMan, New avengers and so on.

Image Comics: Old school Spawn will never die, Invincible is my current Fav.

Top Cow: Loved Darkness and Witchblade
 
Marvel Comics (till about the year 2001) - grew up on Marvel..but it doesnt really appeal to me anymore..its changed in everywhere and not for the better

DC Comics- always been creative, different and uncompromising...they may be slept on by alot of folks but there have been MANY titles that ive enjoyed..especially CatWoman, Wonder Woman (in the 80's and early 90s), Supergirl (late 90's revamp), Birds of Prey, JLI, JLA.

Image- I loved GEN 13!!

and now...im all about Heroic Publishing Inc- that comic house is AWESOME reminds of how Marvel USED to be. Colofrull, creative, off beat..and with so many strong and diverse female characters in the lead like Flare, Psyche, The Black Enchantress and Whiperette....im really enjoying them. the first title i picked up from this publishing house was FLARE and it was a free issue since my comic store does "free comic day" to help promote new and slept on publishing houses. Ive been to their website and now ive definately found my new primary publishing house.
 
My main grounding is in Marvel, as that was the house that gave me my love of comics. These days, however, I've branched out rapidly, becoming a fan of Image, their branch-off Wildstorm, and DC.

These are the titles I'm currently collecting:

MARVEL
Max - Supreme Power, Hyperion, Nighthawk
Mainstream - Young Avengers, New Avengers, Sentry, Wolverine, Amazing Spider-Man
Ultimate Universe - Ultimates, Ultimate Spider-Man, Ultimate X-Men, Ultimate Secret

WILDSTORM
Wildsiderz, The Authority, Planetary

DC (Vertigo)
Transmetropolitan

However, I also love WildC.A.T.S, Gen13, StormWatch, Team7, Backlash, Batman, Superman, Green Lantern, and numerous others...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well basically I guess it's because I love the Batverse - the idea of basically regular people who do extraordinary things based on their intelligence rather than super powers (yes I do know that Superman comes from DC as well ;))

I just think the writing at DC is excellent, intelligent. There's a reality to it I don't find in Marvel. Which is ironic because as a child the cartoons I loved were Spiderman, the X-Men etc.

:)
 
So it's just because of the Bat-family? I can sort of see the realism, in the whole family vibe they give off, and inasmuch as no super-powers are used, but also the tech involved is pretty unbelievable and cool.

Bats is great, but I'm not sure I actually like him any more than I do the Lantern or Superman. Lantern has the great limitations set by his Ring and his humanity, whilst Supes is limited by the social conventions set upon him, highlighted in the epic arc For Tomorrow, namely the need to produce miracles on a daily basis, and the covenant never to strike first, and only to react.
 
Spellbinder said:
Image- I loved GEN 13!!
Click to expand...

R.I.P. Fairchild. Shame they discontinued it.

I started reading Marvel as a kid and thought that they were a little less 'campy' than DC (though if you really look at them all they're kindof equals in that regard). I grew up on Spiderman, the X-Men, and my favorite anti-hero The Punisher.

For me Frank Castle was incredibly interesting because he was not a hero nor recognized himself as such. The media was constantly twisting his actions to always seem like acts of terrorism when in fact more often than not he was simply taking care of criminals that had been evading the law for years. He cut through the red tape with his tanto and did the job the system failed to do.

The last year or so I've gotten into DC and that's because of one comic in particular. I can't really remember how it happened, but somehow I've just become the hugest fan of Robin. Tim Drake is one of the coolest characters in the Batverse and I've been glued to the pages of every comic since Robin 121. Kindof disappointed that they seem to be making him into another brooding Bruce Wayne type, but for me he's the heir apparent to the Batsuit.
 
Tim Drake is fantastic, and the only Robin I have ever found to be worthy of the role. As Batman himself said, Dick Grayson was born for the centre-ring, so has been far better as Nightwing; Jason Todd was impetuous, and saw it all as a game, making him unsuitable, and eventually, a corpse. But Tim, he's something else. Smart, canny, and a quick study, with Batman as a teacher and mentor he'll flourish, and become the greatest of all of them.
 
M
Mat
Well said, oh great pithy one.
A few people here know that I won't buy into DC simply because I find it incredibly hard to follow there continuity plus they don't have a character that appeals to me. I find DC characters too traditional I like characters that push the boundaries. That may say wierd as now that I have researched into DC I have found that they do push their character boundaries but DC still doesn't appeal to me.

I do really only like Marvel comics though throughout my time I have become disillusioned with Marvel but they do tend to rekindle my faith in them from time to time.

I love Marvels venture into its Ultimate concept and the new Supremeverse is leaps and bounds above awesome.

Other than Mavel I live and breath Lady Death in any incarnation Brian Pulido has created on numerous publishers.
 
Hawksmoor said:
But Tim, he's something else. Smart, canny, and a quick study, with Batman as a teacher and mentor he'll flourish, and become the greatest of all of them.
Click to expand...

Wow, I couldn't have said it better myself. I honestly believe that if DC comics continue to evolve the characters Tim Drake will be the next Batman. Or failing that, a superhero of his own caliber which just happens to surpass the others.

The thing that I really love about Tim is that he's very young but yet possess so many qualities already that mark him as a great hero. He's mature and rational but doesn't fail to express himself (his dialogue with Bruce at his late father's funeral is a good example of this), has many skills which he has worked his damndest at to learn.

I really feel that in the recent War Games saga he's really come into his own and demonstrated physical and emotional endurance. That the writers were able to pull-off an almost soap opera like storyline with so much drama and yet keep a comic book serious is amazing to me.

I also think Tony Scott is phenomenal at brining Robin to life.
 
someone mentioned a few of the "spin offs" within Marvel such as the "Ultimates"

that made me think about the fact that During Marvel's trail blazing days in the 80s and even into the 90's, there were several "spin offs" that were REALLY enjoyable to read including: New Universe and M2. one of the WORST spin offs was the 2099 series. they (especially the x-men 2099) were poorly handled. Heros Reborn was garbage, as was Age of Apocolypse (and yet people STILL want to reference character incarnations in that spin off series as if they have any bearing on mainstream). M2 really could have been Marvel's "next generation" if it had been given a chance to get off the ground..but it just goes to show how back by the end of the 90's Marvel was more about PROFIT than quality.

by today's standards...Uncanny X-men would have been CANCELLED as they appeared in the early/mid 80s..for while they had a huge cult following..they were still "underground"...over shadowed by the avengers, fantastic four and spider man(among others) and only loyal comic readers/collectors would know just who that team of Uncanny Xmen were at the time.
 
I'm curious SpellBinder why don't you like the Age of Apocalypse spin off? I thought it was a really creative venture into the characters of the MU and turning them on their head. I thought the lead up to the AoA; Legion quest was brilliant.

I personally think that though Uncanny X-men wasn't what it once was I'm not too sure that it deserve to be cancelled. Claremont's ten year run is legendary that consistantcy and standard is arguably something many writers will fall far short of. I doubt even Claremont will ever reach those heights again.
 
DonDaddyD said:
I'm curious SpellBinder why don't you like the Age of Apocalypse spin off? I thought it was a really creative venture into the characters of the MU and turning them on their head. I thought the lead up to the AoA; Legion quest was brilliant.

I personally think that though Uncanny X-men wasn't what it once was I'm not too sure that it deserve to be cancelled. Claremont's ten year run is legendary that consistantcy and standard is arguably something many writers will fall far short of. I doubt even Claremont will ever reach those heights again.
Click to expand...

LegionQuest was very decent. the artwork, the ferocity of characters like Storm and Psylocke..not to mention a nice view into the back story of Charles and Erik (Magnus). But i just felt that AoA left much to be desired...it promised much (from the previews) and delivered little. I did appreciate the appearence of a version of Illyana of course. I felt it fell flat though after the climax of Legion Quest. Much like the aftermath of Apocolypse and the 12..one of the greatest storylines post Claremont that was a more than a decade long in lead up.

and what i was saying about the Uncanny Xmen is that if the book was as it was back in the early to mid 80s...[take away the commercial hype, the two movies, the merchandising, and leave the book as it was back then with those characters, etc] it would be CANCELLED now because it wouldnt have the commerical impact that it does now. back THEN the Uncanny X-men were underground..most of the characters (the team was predominantly female at the time) were not easily recognized by the casual reader and it wasnt "THE COMIC" on everyone's mind like it is now. personally if it WERE cancelled now as it is right now.i WOULDNT be surprised. its NOTHING like it was in decades....Bob Harras was the last editor in chief to handle that book properly....and i dont know what became of him or his team.
 
Sorry Farrah I misunderstood you. But I still disagree I think if Uncanny went back to the Australia period right now it would further cement X-men’s claims as the Worlds most recognized comic. Claremont has consistently continued to move his team away from the mansion and present them as outlaws. I think his major problem is that it'll always be compared to the 80's period.

But I'm one of the few that probably thinks that if the X-men were presented now in the way they were then they would be more popular because generally they were better comics. What made X-men and what they are popular for was that they were eye opening to certain social issues and Claremont signified that best when he used the X-men concept to deal with the harsh reality of discrimination. I think fans and regular readers would be far better receiving to the title returning to this edgy concept.

I say this because of the success of the Ultimates and other updated versions of comic concepts. In the Ultimates case the comic is well received because it is up to date and not afraid to challenge the reader into entertaining what we think and how we believe the American Government operates. This is pretty much Claremont’s blueprint that he pioneered with titles like Days of future past and God Loves Man Kills. If he were to rewrite his Uncanny titles now in the way he delivered his 80's incarnation by taking back to their original roots where they dealed with more realistic issues I can only see that as a refreshing change thereby making them more popular.
 
I'm not so sure; the outlaw concept was fantastic, and wonderfully enhanced by the move to the Reavers' ex-base in the outback. However, to revisit that state now would only invalidate the innovation of the time. The times have changed, the world has a new outlook, and we must look to the future and find a new innovation that challenges the boundaries of today, not the ones of yesteryear.
 

I prefer MARVEL Comics over any other. Not that the others can’t be as great. I’m sure they are…but, then again I would never know because all the comics I’ve read, bought, or known of are MARVEL. I love anything that has to do with ‘X-Men’, ‘Generation X’, ‘New Mutants’, ‘Excalibur’, and so on. Though, I do enjoy the movies made from D.C. Comics over MARVEL completely.
 
Hyperion

Hawksmoor said:
I'm not so sure; the outlaw concept was fantastic, and wonderfully enhanced by the move to the Reavers' ex-base in the outback. However, to revisit that state now would only invalidate the innovation of the time. The times have changed, the world has a new outlook, and we must look to the future and find a new innovation that challenges the boundaries of today, not the ones of yesteryear.
Click to expand...
Yes moving forward is always good and comics have to adapt and grow with the times. But X-men made there name on a concept that reflected society namely discrimination. For the most part they [the comic] has/did generally forget that concept and they had to get Grant Morrison in to bring the comic and the main characters back to the original concept and their roots. From a psychological point of view we could argue that he took them out of the costumes so that readers could re-establish their connections with the characters as oppose to simply identifying with the Heroes. Morrisons work was further bought forward by Joss Weadon who again has bought the team back to the original concept of equal rights activists and placed his team back in the mansion.

Understandably comics have to move forward to survive the test of time. But what I meant was that the comic can move forward by returning to it's original concept and deal with current issues as oppose to be Galactic spanning superhero's. The whole point of the X-men was to reflect an aspect of society and Claremont was the best at portraying this during his 10yr stinit. In recent years the comic became unpopular because it forgot its roots and they have finally begun to return to the style that Claremont delivered that made the comic great.

So what I'm saying is that Claremont's comics then if released no would be better recieved than what the current writers are putting out.

On a side note I found that what 'made' X-men was the Fox cartoon and many of the episodes were based on Claremonts work.
 
i dont think you're getting my point: im saying that if MARVEL Inc did things as they do TODAY back THEN when the Uncanny X-men were NOT household names and still on the fringes in terms of popularity and what not (again look at the roster at that time, which was primarily female, and most of the characters were still not very well known)...then THAT COMIC might have been cancelled. Its not the COMIC im disputing so much as i am the way Marvel Inc has changed the way it handles things. Titles are no longer given a chance to build a following. M2 had MUCH potential and yet it was scrapped in less than a year.

Im not suggesting the X-men GO BACK (although i do think that a better team is needed and that they should scrap all the needless x-books) ...im saying that if the way Marvel inc did things NOW was how they were done back in the day of Claremont and shortly before...then the Uncanny X-men would not have gotten the chance to get where it is now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top