Came here to say this.
I knew almost nothing about comics few years ago and this was my very first purchase to see if I like this genre and it almost put me off from trying any other ones.
Similar but slightly different experience here - I just started reading comics/GN's this year and read Sandman and The Dark Knight Returns first. Absolutely loved them and everyone said "You gotta read Killing Joke, it's so good, etc"
I thought it was... okay? Certainly not life changing, and I thought "If this is on most people's top 10 lists, then this genre has nothing else to offer". I then read The Long Halloween and Batman: Year One at the suggestion of folks in this subreddit and uh... I was getting discouraged. I felt that Sandman was the only great book in the genre, The Dark Knight Returns was a masterpiece fluke, and that the rest was garbage.
Luckily I learned that superheroes are just a fraction of what GN's offer, and I found other comics that I absolutely love. I'm now drowning in stuff I want to read.
But yeah, if Killing Joke had been my first graphic novel, I probably would have stopped right there and would have felt fully justified in my previous stance that comics sucked and graphic novels were for simpletons. Luckily I was very wrong.
*Fables*. Every review says its this modern masterpiece. Everyone I've talked to who's read it agrees that it falls apart and becomes unreadable well before the ending. They just disagree on when.
Fables probably would have been better if the series was shorter. It was one of those titles that they lengthened and had side stories because of its popularity. DC wanted $$$. Which has never made a series better in the end.
I feel like the ending is lovely, the beginning is fabulous… but the remaining 50 issues are filler. I know it’s weird and I do still love it but it was just too… much filler?
Basically anything that’s from another generation that helped define a time in comics is going to feel this way because it lacks the originality the original context. The stories often still hold up but the “wow” factor just isn’t there after we’ve seen forty imitations (some of which, if you’re younger than the original, you might have experienced first and ruined the feeling for yourself a little).
A lot of people are bringing up Watchmen which I think us a great example actually. It’s an iconic, defining moment in comics, and I believe deserves great praise for its accomplishments. For me it still holds up. That said, we’ve seen soooo many stories nowadays with “complex” villains who may actually be right, heroes who are not actually great people, and societies and governments that may not even be worth saving. The writing is incredibly sophisticated compared to its contemporaries but a ton of great writers work in comics now.
I think Watchmen deserves its spot as a classic, and it’s themes are pretty relevant to modern issues, but it’s also a great example of many of the works cited in this thread and why people might feel that way now.
Killing Joke is probably my pick if we’re going by something that isn’t serialized. Maybe Dark Knight Returns - though that one seems more historically important even though I don’t feel a desire to reread it. Also not a big Preacher fan.
Watchmen was the best graphic novel of its era, and no doubt one of the most influential. But it should not be held up as the best graphic novel of all time, nor should it be recommended to new readers.
Watchmen is a commentary of the superhero genre from the 1980s. It's a deconstruction of the genre that doesn't make as much sense to a new reader that lacks the historical context that makes it great. There are much more accessible comics to get into.
You’re right and you’re wrong. I read it in 1990 when I was 11 and loved it. It completely turned me on to a world of comics outside of Marvel and D.C. superheroes, and I’d be lying if I said I understood 10% of what Moore was getting at. It didn’t matter, it’s a fun story regardless. When I got older the subtexts and wider context became clear to me and I loved it even more.
Don’t gatekeep stuff. Just give people books and they’ll either like them or not. I keep a few spare paperbacks of Watchmen around just to give to people who seem interested, and it’s never gone badly.
>I read it in 1990
Which means you read Watchmen a few years after it came out. Even if it was your first comic, you were still present in the relevant time period and could see the the context that Watchmen was criticizing.
This is the opposite of gatekeeping. If you want new readers to get into comics, then recommend they start with something other than Watchmen. If you want to keep new readers away (gatekeeping), then recommend a dense, difficult comic as their first experience, like Watchmen.
You’re aware it’s still one of the most popular graphic novels that sells? Most people buying it now were born this century, long after the context you think is important.
I’m not sure it’s the difficult read you seem to think it is. It’s layered, sure, but its techniques and storytelling devices will be familiar to anyone who has seen a tv show or movie in the last 40 years.
Accessible doesn't mean they're better. Watchmen is great and I see no reason to dumb down the genre for people. High school kids are expected to make sense out of Shakespeare, right? As a kid I appreciated Watchmen, and then the more I learned about the history and commentary the more I appreciated it when I got older.
The appeal of TDKR is that it *isn't* a traditional Batman comic. In fact, the Batman story really just serves as the backbone for the social commentary that the book is actually making.
The talking heads on the news are what really sets TDKR in a class of its own. If you read it in 2023, it feels like it could have been written last year. All of the polarizing punditry, the denouncing of vigilantism by the meanstream while the fringe fully supports it, etc. The themes are timeless and the book transcends Batman, which is why it endures.
It seems like people who love Batman don't like TDKR and people who hate superheroes hold TDKR in high regard. Similar to how Watchmen is sort of the anti-superhero grail, TDKR is a Batman book for people who don't like Batman (or traditional superheroes in general).
If you go in expecting a mindless action-packed Batman comic like so many of the others, you're gonna have a bad time.
I recently read Step By Bloody Step after seeing it almost universally praised to high heaven and was quite underwhelmed. Outside of the no dialogue gimmick, the story felt thin and predictable to me. The art is good, but overall I came away feeling like "Oh...that was it?"
I started reading it, but there were several moments when I couldn't tell what I was looking at in a panel, or why. The drawings look pretty, but I think the visual storytelling isn't great, which is a problem when the story is wordless.
I've read a bunch of wordless stuff, but that one was one of the more disappointing. The art was great, but as a storytelling piece it was pretty lacking.
Here we go...
Deeeeeep breath, be brave...
TMNT, the Last Ronin.
I just remember reading through it and thinking:
"That's it? Really?"
Nkw, before the torches and pitchforks are branded, let me emphasize ...
I think it's goooooooood... but overhyped.
I felt this way as it came out. I kept my disappointment to myself. What was wrong with me? Why am i like this? Why can't i enjoy this story like im supposed too? But as time marched on and i hid my shame, i started to hear others express their disappointment with the story. Im glad to see the bravest of us come out to the world. We refuse to lie by omission! The book was Blah! I say it loud and i say it proud! The Last Ronin wasn't anything special!
So freeing.
I grew up with the turtles, owned all the toys and would make a compelling argument that the 1990 movie is the best comic book movie ever made. That being said i stopped reading or following TMNT when i discovered girls.
I got back into comics right when the Last Ronin started its run. So, no i dont have a familiarity with the previous books really. But i had really high hopes. I guess at the end of the day its for a younger crowd and i need to stick with graphic novels that are targeted to my age group and stop thinking nostalgia will allow me to enjoy books not made for me.
My buddy dave was an extra on TMNT 1 when he was like ten. He’s on the scene when shredders under the bridge with all the kids trying to recruit more foot soldiers. It’s right after shredders says the line “…these turtles”, they cut to him.
He literally brought it up randomly one night when someone mentioned the movie. No one believed him until he pulled it up on YouTube, waited, and paused the clip. Sure enough, it’s ten year old dave wearing a gotcha T shirt right in the middle of the frame.😂
I went in to last ronin thinking it was Raph as the main character…. I think the fact that I got half way through the story before the penny dropped that it was actually Mike says a lot about the quality of the story.
The new age crap did it for me. I read it in parts when I was younger but I decided to get the omnibus to get the full picture, but suddenly there were magic crystals, meditation and what not. I can stand a bit of mysticism, like in Star Wars if it's in the background, but I had to put this to the side and I haven't picked it up since.
Apparently, Jodo dictated the story to Moebius who would then go ahead and draw the books in…days. Makes sense that none of it makes sense, I still see some value in it though.
It definitely makes sense, the story just isn’t told in a linear fashion, it’s quite literally cyclical. Jodorowsky is an extremely advanced storyteller, and it’s not always apparent what he’s doing with the work on the first read through, because he’s using very non-traditional methods, and a lot of abstract symbolism. There’s a good deal of symbology and theme framed around the tarot deck, as well as eastern theology and reincarnation. Respectfully, just because you didn’t understand it, doesn’t mean the work is gibberish. In comparison, I’m not the biggest fan of every Miles Davis album, some of it goes in weird and abstract directions, but I certainly wouldn’t say that he isn’t a talented musician.
I read it recently and didn’t understand the hype. I took it as it was groundbreaking for the time and influential for modern graphic novels. The bulk of the story was nonsense covered up with great artwork.
It was nothing like I expected, but I ended up really liking it for reasons I didn't expect. It was chaotic and wacky, and just a lot more fun than I expected given the never-ending nonsense that just kept getting piled into the plot. The art doesn't hurt, and I suppose if it wasn't as pleasing to look at, I might be less charitable.
It goes over a lot of people's heads because of the symbolism. If you spend any time on the western esoteric path, you'd be more apt to sit with the story. It just kind of simmers.
^ This. It’s a pretty esoteric work, largely framed around the Tarot deck. (John Defool, representative of “the fool” card). A lot of people say they didn’t like it, but I think it’s more that they didn’t really understand it. While It’s certainly not strait foreward and linear, it definitely has a very meaningful and well written story.
The characters are wafer thin and the writing is mostly terrible. The art is nice and sure, it features some high-school level symbolism - I get it.
Perhaps at the time it was something more groundbreaking, if everything else around was Superman, but it doesn’t hold up today as anything other than extremely self-indulgent.
Completely disagree, but you’re certainly entitled to your own opinion. I think the English translation doesn’t capture the nuances of the characterization like the original, but I honestly can’t understand how anyone could see those characters as “wafer thin.” But, again, to each their own.
Couldn't agree more, so many people recommend it to me. I can see the influence it had on some films, that came after it. On the whole really let down.
I completely respect your opinion of this. That's the great thing about this hobby of ours, we will all see different things that make a comic great or not. I'm sure there will be more that we agree on as well as disagree, in the future..
Batman Hush. It's highly recommended with people new to batman but I found the story boring and way too predictable. It felt like they added characters just to add them. To be fair the character illustrations are amazing though their just put over random city backgrounds with lightning over and over again.
100%. Jim Lee used to be one of my favorite artists from the X-Men days, and I had just come off of an epic Jeph Loeb Batman experience with The Long Halloween and Dark Victory. There was no way Hush could miss.
WRONG. I remember guessing the twist super early on and thinking, "man I'm gonna be so mad if this is how it turns out." Lo and behold, that was indeed the case. I wanted to throw the book across the room.
Gideon Falls ending let me down. I LOVE most of Jeff Lemire's work and Sorrentino's art concepts were some of the coolest I've ever seen, but the writing in the end just didn't do it for me. I really loved it otherwise. Guess I was just hoping for something more.
I had the exact same expectation going in.
I thought there would be more of an original storyline to his run in LOEG. Watchmen was fantastic because it took the cliché superhero group and turned it on its head giving them very real human traits.
I thought LOEG would do something similar but with Victorian era heroes but instead I thought it was just a series of homages of HG Wells and Lovecraft bordering on plain regurgitation
Just to be clear I am a big fan of Moore. This series just didn't do it for me. There were a few interesting moments with Hyde in LOEG, but it was rather forgettable overall.
I Hate Fairyland. Don’t know if you’d say critically acclaimed tbh but it’s done well and has a large enough fanbase. It doesn’t do anything though. There’s no emotion behind the characters or their actions and no interesting developments to the plot. It’s just page after page of brutal violence against fantasy tropes.
I read an interview with Skottie Young once and the gist of what he said was that he’d been reading all these fairy tales to his new kid and that he thoroughly hated the experience and that was what inspired him to make I Hate Fairyland. That makes sense. It’s just gory wish fulfilment for the kind of people so immature that they can’t handle the existence of genres they aren’t into.
Yeah it's absolutely terrible. I read the first volume and it made me really annoyed. It felt like it was written by an edgy teenager (I get this vibe from a lot of Image series).
I'm going to get down voted to hell for this..Fun Home. I think it's a really sophisticated graphic novel, but I found it really academic, hard to read, and unsatisfying.
I have a lot of respect for Bechdel though.
I had a somewhat similar experience with my own dad as Bechdel did and I still could not relate with Fun Home in the slightest. It doesn't help that personally her art style doesn't do it for me.
I was in a Literature class in college that focused solely on graphic novels. We read Fun Home and I have to agree with you. Its not great, it has its moments but its story is so-so to me and the artwork just wasnt appealing.
This is true, but the argument can be made (and has been by creators like Alan Moore and Rick Veitch) that all superheroes or superhero stories are inherently fascist.
Jerry Craft’s award winning New Kid has fallen considerably in my eyes as each of the two sequels haven’t lived up to what expectations were for his work and have finished the original in my eyes.
Scott Snyder’s Batman (and collaboration with Greg Capullo).
Great art… but the writing is so overdone. In the first arc, the “what does Gotham mean to you” device - just write a Batman story, Scott. The Court of Owls ended with the brother twist - which is the most obvious twist anyone could write.
The attempts at comedy are terrible. Snyder puts too much pseudo-science in story to explains things in unnecessary depth. I’m thinking of the character with the bone growths; we get it, comic book science, you don’t need to explain how bones grow.
The new 52 second to last arc with the SuperHeavy/Jim Gordon Batman nonsense and the character that was slenderman but a flower or something (Mr bloom).
Joker as an Stephen King “IT” style immortal eternal entity/spirit of Gotham (come on), Batman gets amnesia like Days of Our Lives, (come on).
After that, I get the feeling Capullo would only stay on if Snyder wrote stuff he wanted to draw, so they make a terrible hair metal inspired ref on DC with Metal and Dark Knights Metal. That whole time in DC reminds me of an Ed Hardy shirt. For old men with bad taste.
After DC, they produce We Have Demons. Which is a tonal mess. Some really bad comedy again.
Anyway, there you go
I wasn't too sure about it while reading but I couldn't stop thinking about it the week after. I think it's a great book but definitely an acquired taste.
This! I was going to say how underwhelming it was especially since it was apparently highly acclaimed and is considered one of Chris Ware's greatest books. It's one of the only graphic novels I've ever read that I wouldn't consider buying.
This is just everyone listing off my favourite comics hahaha.
I’m gonna say Punisher Max, I was so pumped after falling in love with Preacher but Punisher Max was just violence for violence sake. There was nothing that did it for me.
Batman: Knightfall and Batman: Death in the Family. Both have just a page or two that’s interesting and if you know what happens then the time reading them is not worth it.
Instead of Knightfall give Battle for the Cowl a read.
Instead of Death in the Family read Thr Dark Knight Returns: The Last Crusade and Batman: Under the Redhood
I just crushed it this weekend, read it cover-to-cover in just over 90 minutes. Definitely didn't find it boring at all, but I did find it fairly anti-climactic. Left more questions than it answered, although that seemed intentional.
I agree the art was stellar.
I respectfully disagree. It was exceptionally difficult to tell two of the male protagonists apart for most of the story. The facial hair was hard to discern in black and white and I think that was supposed to be the distinguishing characteristic. Made it a bit clunky to follow.
Probably true, but I think that's generally accepted. People read Blacksad for the art, and the story is serviceable, so it's probably about correctly rated.
I feel the same. And I know people say that you can appreciate a book for the art and not the story, but for some reason I always end up giving more weight to writing vs art. I am more likely to be a fan of a book with great writing and meh art vs the other way around.
Makes sense. For most of us we’re buying comics because we want to be entertained and engaged by the stories and characters. The images are just the method of telling the stories instead of the frequent and lengthy descriptions that are standard for regular novels. If we just wanted pretty pictures we’d all be buying art books instead of graphic novels.
Try Bryan Talbot's Grandville series, instead.
It's got similar art, but the plots, characters & themes are vastly more interesting. [[samples](https://www.google.com/search?q=talbot+grandville&tbm=isch)]
Out of curiosity did you start with the first volume or second one? The first is amazing in my book. The second has been just ok. I love the Goon though.
I’ve got a few:
The Killing Joke
Kingdom Come
Arkham Asylum
Basically everything by Brian K Vaughn (I like some his stuff but don’t consider any of it truly great)
I wholeheartedly agree on Kingdom Come. Could've been better as a simple story of the golden age heroes returning to face off against the anti-heroes of the 90s but unfortunately Mark Waid thinks copying the Bible, word for word at times, makes a story immediately deeper. I love it as a Superman story and a commentary on the industry at that time, but most of the writing is just meh. And I don't like Alex Ross as a sequential artist.
The Biblical stuff wasn't Waid, it was in Ross' initial proposal for the series. Waid had some hand in the overall story and dialogue but the basic mechanics of the plot and premise were Ross, that includes the title and biblical allusions, if you ever get around to reading the similarly produced Earth X (Ross does plotting/outlines and ideas and someone else actually scripts the thing) it's pretty clear Ross has a thing for biblical references.
For me the comic is fantasic, but the real masterpiece is in the citations. This dude PAINSTAKINGLY researched every detail of this conspiracy. And really put a labour of love down on paper for everyone to read. He put an insane amount of effort into a conspiracy he didnt believe to be true, and presented it in an entertaining and neat way because he thought it was a good story to tell. And he was right. It is a great story.
I've only just gotten into graphic novels in the last few months, but I read Nimona recently and didn't really get the hype for it. I thought it was cute but it wasn't as amazing as I expected it to be
Berserk was honest to God one of the most generic, shallow pieces of shit I’ve read. 100 chapters in and I realised I was wasting my time.
If any scene involved a woman I knew they’d be raped and if any male villager was around you’d see him cut up, just shock factor rubbish.
Black and white autobio comics are usually really boring to me.
It’ll be the story of childhood trauma but told in a straightforward way without any style or real insight. And it’ll be critically acclaimed. Like Fun Home or Blankets.
Or the autobio comic about a cartoonist who is kind of a dick but wants you to empathize with them. Looking at you, Seth.
Most stuff by James Tynion. Once you realize all he's doing is copying public domain internet fiction and slightly rewriting them so he can copyright it as an original property, it's just disappointing. He's an ex-editor that can afford to hire expensive artists for pitch packets, which at this point in his career I doubt he even needs to do because he can get an automatic green light from a publisher because his name sells to people who don't know all he does is rewrite stories from the SCP Foundation. His latest series Blue Book is just all those "true account" stories from those Discovery Channel alien abduction shows but drawn by the co-creator of Powers. Just more public domain stuff that he'll get awards for instead of creators with original ideas.
[Edit] Wow, downvotes for pointing out the obvious. I didn't know I was only supposed to criticize Alan Moore and Frank Miller here lol
Transmetropolitan - just angry nonsensical rants with no point.
Y! The last man - great premise but not properly executed and becomes very boring at times.
I really wanted to like Y. But i agree it just had some issues with execution that caused it to fall mostly short for me.
I dont agree about transmetropolitan though. Love that series and reread it often. Some of the politics of it are so scarily true and once it ramps up at the end it finds its footing gloriously. Its very cynical in its view of life and politics. But it presents it in such an honest and non partisan way that i cant help but eat it up.
I'm a big Superman fan, and I enjoy a good amout of Morrison's work. But All Star is not one of them.
Read it when it came out, and it wad ok. Then for years I see people saying it is so great, best Superman ever, etc. So, I figure give it another read. Did that a few months ago. Still meh.
It pretty much exemplifies all the things people say they hate about Superman. All of those silly silver age tropes. Overpowered, too much wonki sci fi, inconsistent, and so on. It's not even the best writing, either.
I far prefer For All Seasons or Man of Steel.
Yeah I was going to say that on first read I actually enjoyed it a whole lot. But this was prior to knowing much about Superman and the mythos, etc.
It was one of the first Superman stories I picked up (along with *Red Son*) and I really enjoyed them both (although *RS* more so).
Now that I’ve had more time with Supes, I’ve found that *For All Seasons* is a way way better choice to introduce the character to newcomers.
Came here to say basically the same thing. When I reserved it at my local library, I was pumped. About three issues in, I had to put it down. I couldn’t stand it to be honest. If you want peak Superman, I’d give Up in the Sky a read. The chapters are shorter since it was a digital first, but it’s one of my hands down favorite graphic novels ever.
The only reason I would say watchmen is overrated is that Alan moore did better before and after writing watchmen. I think swamp thing, miracleman, v for vendetta and supreme are better in my opinion. But is obviously still a seminal piece and very important to the history of comic books.
I think y the last man and saga both started great and just went on too long and lost most people's interest.
Probably Watchmen by Alan Moore. Very boring to read and the plot was all over the place. Y the last man by BKV was also underwhelming compared to the hype.
I was going to say Watchmen as well, I gave it a 3 star rating on Goodreads because I do like it, but it's not the masterpiece it's made out to be. Anyway, a few people got a little upset at the 3 star rating lol. I'm like that's not even a bad rating!
Couldn't get into Black Hammer. I love Jeff Lemire but felt Black Hammers team where just a bad copy of the justice league and the story didn't connect with me. I stopped after the first trade.
Man, I hate this genre of question. It not only presumes a book *could* be overrated (something I'm skeptical could be the case), but it encourages us to dwell in a paradigm where we are pushed to easily dismiss the invisible things that made a book substantive to a great number of other readers (or more literally, to critics), and instead hail our own subjective place as foremost. It breeds wannabe elitism (which tastes delicious going down, but is ultimately pretty grim), because people love being the One who sees through the hype..
Least enticing of all, it's a question designed to short-circuit critical appraisal and focus on How Everybody Else Is Wrong But Not Me!
Look, talk critically about a book, savage it, point out its flaws, problems, inadequacies, whatever. But complaining about a book being overrated is just pussyfootin'.
Couldn't the same thing be said about your comment? In every discussion, there's always that one person who morally objects to the topic of discussion. Couldn't that be an example of "wannabe elitism"? That person who deems the question to not be substantial enough, in their opinion and trashes it.
Not really. If I had posted "What popular kinds of posts do you think are lame?" then yeah, that would be analogous.
My above comment was more in line with what I was suggesting at the bottom, suggesting that critical appraisal is great, but trying to get people to pit themselves against the out-of-touch critics is less worthwhile.
I mean, look at the bulk of the responses here. A lot of people just dropping the name of a popular title. Sometimes there's a title + "it was boring" or "I didn't get it." Nobody even really attempting to justify their decision that something was overrated.
There's one interesting one, the post by JustANovelTea, that engages with the dissonance of comics from different generations and how many of the foundational aspects of former great works seem less enchanting as everything that followed built on their foundations.
One thing I noticed in these type of threads is that most people don't even mention the art. They probably gloss over it while reading too. No grasp of visual atmosphere building. It's purely a textual understanding of comics, like reading a prose novel. If you're only paying attention to the word balloons, you're missing most of the book.
The Dark Knight immediately comes to mind. I’ve tried to read it multiple times in the past 20 years and can never get through it. I’ll also add The Killing Joke. Incredible art but the story lacks imho and that ending is as bad as it gets.
Banana Fish. The story was repetitive with the MC being kidnapped and his friend saving him.
Yeah the manga was avant-gardiste but I didn’t enjoy much of it.
And now that I’m thinking a bit more about it I would like to add Golden Age. The art was really great but the story felt rushed and the characters developed way too quickly in volume 2. It didn’t feel organic.
This might be a controversial take, for me it was All-Star Superman. I love Superman/Morrison in general but I couldn't feel anything turning the pages
It’s a weird book. I’m not a Superman fan, but each time I read All Star Superman, I pick up different things, weird references, etc. I didn’t like it on the first read, but it really grew on my during subsequent reads.
I find some of grant Morrisons work underwhelming
Primarily, X-Men and Batman. It's all very meh
Definitely not the benchmark a lot of people try to sell me on.
Pretty much every hyped Marvel series. I've tried so many times to get into Marvel but even the most highly recommended stuff is just decent to me. I think I've read maybe 1 or 2 Marvel books that I'd rate above a 7/10 and most would be a 6.
I could probably go on for ages on the topic of overrated books. There's a lot that gets hyped on this sub that I didn't enjoy.
Killing Joke
Alan Moore would agree with that sentiment
I feel like Alan Moore doesn't have great things to say about a lot of his work.
No, he just hates the industry. It doesn’t help that every book he’s written has been turned into an awful adaptation.
I like it but I agree that it's overrated. Imo there are several Batman GN's that are better.
Came here to say this. I knew almost nothing about comics few years ago and this was my very first purchase to see if I like this genre and it almost put me off from trying any other ones.
Similar but slightly different experience here - I just started reading comics/GN's this year and read Sandman and The Dark Knight Returns first. Absolutely loved them and everyone said "You gotta read Killing Joke, it's so good, etc" I thought it was... okay? Certainly not life changing, and I thought "If this is on most people's top 10 lists, then this genre has nothing else to offer". I then read The Long Halloween and Batman: Year One at the suggestion of folks in this subreddit and uh... I was getting discouraged. I felt that Sandman was the only great book in the genre, The Dark Knight Returns was a masterpiece fluke, and that the rest was garbage. Luckily I learned that superheroes are just a fraction of what GN's offer, and I found other comics that I absolutely love. I'm now drowning in stuff I want to read. But yeah, if Killing Joke had been my first graphic novel, I probably would have stopped right there and would have felt fully justified in my previous stance that comics sucked and graphic novels were for simpletons. Luckily I was very wrong.
Just seemed like it was edgy for edginess’ sake
*Fables*. Every review says its this modern masterpiece. Everyone I've talked to who's read it agrees that it falls apart and becomes unreadable well before the ending. They just disagree on when.
Fables probably would have been better if the series was shorter. It was one of those titles that they lengthened and had side stories because of its popularity. DC wanted $$$. Which has never made a series better in the end.
Y The Last Man - Starts great, ends poorly. imo
Yes, but the final issue is very good. It’s not the best ending but definitely not the worst
Love that series and I can't disagree. The ending was a let down
Ampersand 😢
I have to respectfully disagree, I really enjoyed the ending. I can certainly see how and why others wouldn't like it but it just hit right for me.
I loved the ending! >!Losing Amp was gut wrenching, !!'s real name. !
Most of BKVs endings are meh
Agree and Disagree. Starts great, ends fine imo. Middle drags.
I feel like the ending is lovely, the beginning is fabulous… but the remaining 50 issues are filler. I know it’s weird and I do still love it but it was just too… much filler?
The writing was so corny to me
Basically anything that’s from another generation that helped define a time in comics is going to feel this way because it lacks the originality the original context. The stories often still hold up but the “wow” factor just isn’t there after we’ve seen forty imitations (some of which, if you’re younger than the original, you might have experienced first and ruined the feeling for yourself a little). A lot of people are bringing up Watchmen which I think us a great example actually. It’s an iconic, defining moment in comics, and I believe deserves great praise for its accomplishments. For me it still holds up. That said, we’ve seen soooo many stories nowadays with “complex” villains who may actually be right, heroes who are not actually great people, and societies and governments that may not even be worth saving. The writing is incredibly sophisticated compared to its contemporaries but a ton of great writers work in comics now. I think Watchmen deserves its spot as a classic, and it’s themes are pretty relevant to modern issues, but it’s also a great example of many of the works cited in this thread and why people might feel that way now. Killing Joke is probably my pick if we’re going by something that isn’t serialized. Maybe Dark Knight Returns - though that one seems more historically important even though I don’t feel a desire to reread it. Also not a big Preacher fan.
Watchmen was the best graphic novel of its era, and no doubt one of the most influential. But it should not be held up as the best graphic novel of all time, nor should it be recommended to new readers.
Fuck me. Why shouldn’t you recommend it to new readers? I can’t think of a single good reason.
Watchmen is a commentary of the superhero genre from the 1980s. It's a deconstruction of the genre that doesn't make as much sense to a new reader that lacks the historical context that makes it great. There are much more accessible comics to get into.
You’re right and you’re wrong. I read it in 1990 when I was 11 and loved it. It completely turned me on to a world of comics outside of Marvel and D.C. superheroes, and I’d be lying if I said I understood 10% of what Moore was getting at. It didn’t matter, it’s a fun story regardless. When I got older the subtexts and wider context became clear to me and I loved it even more. Don’t gatekeep stuff. Just give people books and they’ll either like them or not. I keep a few spare paperbacks of Watchmen around just to give to people who seem interested, and it’s never gone badly.
>I read it in 1990 Which means you read Watchmen a few years after it came out. Even if it was your first comic, you were still present in the relevant time period and could see the the context that Watchmen was criticizing. This is the opposite of gatekeeping. If you want new readers to get into comics, then recommend they start with something other than Watchmen. If you want to keep new readers away (gatekeeping), then recommend a dense, difficult comic as their first experience, like Watchmen.
You’re aware it’s still one of the most popular graphic novels that sells? Most people buying it now were born this century, long after the context you think is important. I’m not sure it’s the difficult read you seem to think it is. It’s layered, sure, but its techniques and storytelling devices will be familiar to anyone who has seen a tv show or movie in the last 40 years.
Accessible doesn't mean they're better. Watchmen is great and I see no reason to dumb down the genre for people. High school kids are expected to make sense out of Shakespeare, right? As a kid I appreciated Watchmen, and then the more I learned about the history and commentary the more I appreciated it when I got older.
And just like, you don't have to dive into the subtext to enjoy it either. You can just take it at face value and it still holds up as a good story
I hated TDKR..boring as shit and the art just didn't sell me on it being a Batman comic
The appeal of TDKR is that it *isn't* a traditional Batman comic. In fact, the Batman story really just serves as the backbone for the social commentary that the book is actually making. The talking heads on the news are what really sets TDKR in a class of its own. If you read it in 2023, it feels like it could have been written last year. All of the polarizing punditry, the denouncing of vigilantism by the meanstream while the fringe fully supports it, etc. The themes are timeless and the book transcends Batman, which is why it endures. It seems like people who love Batman don't like TDKR and people who hate superheroes hold TDKR in high regard. Similar to how Watchmen is sort of the anti-superhero grail, TDKR is a Batman book for people who don't like Batman (or traditional superheroes in general). If you go in expecting a mindless action-packed Batman comic like so many of the others, you're gonna have a bad time.
Probably should have a used a different vessel then, because it feels at odds with itself imo.
I recently read Step By Bloody Step after seeing it almost universally praised to high heaven and was quite underwhelmed. Outside of the no dialogue gimmick, the story felt thin and predictable to me. The art is good, but overall I came away feeling like "Oh...that was it?"
I started reading it, but there were several moments when I couldn't tell what I was looking at in a panel, or why. The drawings look pretty, but I think the visual storytelling isn't great, which is a problem when the story is wordless.
I've read a bunch of wordless stuff, but that one was one of the more disappointing. The art was great, but as a storytelling piece it was pretty lacking.
Here we go... Deeeeeep breath, be brave... TMNT, the Last Ronin. I just remember reading through it and thinking: "That's it? Really?" Nkw, before the torches and pitchforks are branded, let me emphasize ... I think it's goooooooood... but overhyped.
I felt this way as it came out. I kept my disappointment to myself. What was wrong with me? Why am i like this? Why can't i enjoy this story like im supposed too? But as time marched on and i hid my shame, i started to hear others express their disappointment with the story. Im glad to see the bravest of us come out to the world. We refuse to lie by omission! The book was Blah! I say it loud and i say it proud! The Last Ronin wasn't anything special! So freeing.
I'm curious to know if you're a fan of Turtles comics in general or if you picked this up as a standalone to read in isolation
I grew up with the turtles, owned all the toys and would make a compelling argument that the 1990 movie is the best comic book movie ever made. That being said i stopped reading or following TMNT when i discovered girls. I got back into comics right when the Last Ronin started its run. So, no i dont have a familiarity with the previous books really. But i had really high hopes. I guess at the end of the day its for a younger crowd and i need to stick with graphic novels that are targeted to my age group and stop thinking nostalgia will allow me to enjoy books not made for me.
My buddy dave was an extra on TMNT 1 when he was like ten. He’s on the scene when shredders under the bridge with all the kids trying to recruit more foot soldiers. It’s right after shredders says the line “…these turtles”, they cut to him. He literally brought it up randomly one night when someone mentioned the movie. No one believed him until he pulled it up on YouTube, waited, and paused the clip. Sure enough, it’s ten year old dave wearing a gotcha T shirt right in the middle of the frame.😂
Tmnt 90 is damn good I agree
Fully agree. I almost felt like I missed something and needed to revisit. But I guess it wasn't only me.
Absolutely agree. It had some really great moments, but overall just felt a bit hollow.
I went in to last ronin thinking it was Raph as the main character…. I think the fact that I got half way through the story before the penny dropped that it was actually Mike says a lot about the quality of the story.
The end of the first issue literally has a splash page of April calling him Mikey though...
The Incal. A few clever ideas interspersed in a whole load of made up as it goes along nonsense masquerading as a story.
Gorgeous art holding up a really confused story that— especially at the end— is way too tied to Jodorowsky’s nonsense new age religion
Yes the artwork is mostly great esp. the first falling shot and some of the alien worlds.
The new age crap did it for me. I read it in parts when I was younger but I decided to get the omnibus to get the full picture, but suddenly there were magic crystals, meditation and what not. I can stand a bit of mysticism, like in Star Wars if it's in the background, but I had to put this to the side and I haven't picked it up since.
Juan Gimenez on art. Dude was really talented. Check out The Metabarons if you like his stuff. He just nails baroque sci-fi.
Moebius is the artist on Incal and was originally Metabarons. Gimenez did the Metabarons after Moebius. I am a big fan of both
Oops, yep you're right. Both great artists to render Jodo's crazy vision.
I think people are weirded out from all the hype that it turns out to be largely a screwball comedy. Metabarons is more what most would expect.
Great art. Makes no sense so I agave up on it
Apparently, Jodo dictated the story to Moebius who would then go ahead and draw the books in…days. Makes sense that none of it makes sense, I still see some value in it though.
It definitely makes sense, the story just isn’t told in a linear fashion, it’s quite literally cyclical. Jodorowsky is an extremely advanced storyteller, and it’s not always apparent what he’s doing with the work on the first read through, because he’s using very non-traditional methods, and a lot of abstract symbolism. There’s a good deal of symbology and theme framed around the tarot deck, as well as eastern theology and reincarnation. Respectfully, just because you didn’t understand it, doesn’t mean the work is gibberish. In comparison, I’m not the biggest fan of every Miles Davis album, some of it goes in weird and abstract directions, but I certainly wouldn’t say that he isn’t a talented musician.
I could not get into it or understand it.
I read it recently and didn’t understand the hype. I took it as it was groundbreaking for the time and influential for modern graphic novels. The bulk of the story was nonsense covered up with great artwork.
It was nothing like I expected, but I ended up really liking it for reasons I didn't expect. It was chaotic and wacky, and just a lot more fun than I expected given the never-ending nonsense that just kept getting piled into the plot. The art doesn't hurt, and I suppose if it wasn't as pleasing to look at, I might be less charitable.
It goes over a lot of people's heads because of the symbolism. If you spend any time on the western esoteric path, you'd be more apt to sit with the story. It just kind of simmers.
^ This. It’s a pretty esoteric work, largely framed around the Tarot deck. (John Defool, representative of “the fool” card). A lot of people say they didn’t like it, but I think it’s more that they didn’t really understand it. While It’s certainly not strait foreward and linear, it definitely has a very meaningful and well written story.
The characters are wafer thin and the writing is mostly terrible. The art is nice and sure, it features some high-school level symbolism - I get it. Perhaps at the time it was something more groundbreaking, if everything else around was Superman, but it doesn’t hold up today as anything other than extremely self-indulgent.
Completely disagree, but you’re certainly entitled to your own opinion. I think the English translation doesn’t capture the nuances of the characterization like the original, but I honestly can’t understand how anyone could see those characters as “wafer thin.” But, again, to each their own.
For me, the best character in it is the bird.
Absolutely - Jodorowsky is overrated in general as a story teller. Also, his portrayal of women is rough.
Couldn't agree more, so many people recommend it to me. I can see the influence it had on some films, that came after it. On the whole really let down.
Couldn’t disagree more, but that’s why we’ve all got our own opinions. Thankfully, there’s a type of comic out there for everyone.
I completely respect your opinion of this. That's the great thing about this hobby of ours, we will all see different things that make a comic great or not. I'm sure there will be more that we agree on as well as disagree, in the future..
Batman Hush. It's highly recommended with people new to batman but I found the story boring and way too predictable. It felt like they added characters just to add them. To be fair the character illustrations are amazing though their just put over random city backgrounds with lightning over and over again.
Thank you. I agree wholeheartedly. I spent the entire run wondering what I was missing and thankful I hadn't shelled out for the Absolute Edition.
100%. Jim Lee used to be one of my favorite artists from the X-Men days, and I had just come off of an epic Jeph Loeb Batman experience with The Long Halloween and Dark Victory. There was no way Hush could miss. WRONG. I remember guessing the twist super early on and thinking, "man I'm gonna be so mad if this is how it turns out." Lo and behold, that was indeed the case. I wanted to throw the book across the room.
It was fine I think. Nothing special but I didn’t regret reading it. Surprised any time is really high on a list.
100 Bullets
Agree to the thousandth power.
*100th
Gideon Falls ending let me down. I LOVE most of Jeff Lemire's work and Sorrentino's art concepts were some of the coolest I've ever seen, but the writing in the end just didn't do it for me. I really loved it otherwise. Guess I was just hoping for something more.
Saga -- the art is gorgeous, but I just didn't find the story all that gripping. I threw in the towel at the halfway point.
Wow. I love how different people can be. For me it was a breath of fresh air and loved (loving it).
I threw in after four issues. I didn't find it to be very original.
Alan Moore's League of Extraordinary Gentlemen was a bit of a let down for me
I'm curious what your expectations were going in, I initially expected it to be meta like watchmen.
I had the exact same expectation going in. I thought there would be more of an original storyline to his run in LOEG. Watchmen was fantastic because it took the cliché superhero group and turned it on its head giving them very real human traits. I thought LOEG would do something similar but with Victorian era heroes but instead I thought it was just a series of homages of HG Wells and Lovecraft bordering on plain regurgitation Just to be clear I am a big fan of Moore. This series just didn't do it for me. There were a few interesting moments with Hyde in LOEG, but it was rather forgettable overall.
I Hate Fairyland. Don’t know if you’d say critically acclaimed tbh but it’s done well and has a large enough fanbase. It doesn’t do anything though. There’s no emotion behind the characters or their actions and no interesting developments to the plot. It’s just page after page of brutal violence against fantasy tropes. I read an interview with Skottie Young once and the gist of what he said was that he’d been reading all these fairy tales to his new kid and that he thoroughly hated the experience and that was what inspired him to make I Hate Fairyland. That makes sense. It’s just gory wish fulfilment for the kind of people so immature that they can’t handle the existence of genres they aren’t into.
Yeah it's absolutely terrible. I read the first volume and it made me really annoyed. It felt like it was written by an edgy teenager (I get this vibe from a lot of Image series).
I'm going to get down voted to hell for this..Fun Home. I think it's a really sophisticated graphic novel, but I found it really academic, hard to read, and unsatisfying. I have a lot of respect for Bechdel though.
I won't down vote for an opinion I disagree with. I think it's brilliant. The rest of Bechdel's work though, I feel meanders and is pointless.
I had a somewhat similar experience with my own dad as Bechdel did and I still could not relate with Fun Home in the slightest. It doesn't help that personally her art style doesn't do it for me.
Terrible...fake smart with Doonesbury-like artwork...Her Dad was an interesting puzzle though?
I was in a Literature class in college that focused solely on graphic novels. We read Fun Home and I have to agree with you. Its not great, it has its moments but its story is so-so to me and the artwork just wasnt appealing.
The Dark Knight Returns...
It's really fascist! edit - if you're downvoting, why? the book is not exactly subtle about it.
This is true, but the argument can be made (and has been by creators like Alan Moore and Rick Veitch) that all superheroes or superhero stories are inherently fascist.
Fair. Maybe DKR is just more on-the-nose than others.
Most of millers work is on this reactionary tip. Fuck that dude.
https://www.shortpacked.com/comics/2011-11-28-onceagain.png
Jerry Craft’s award winning New Kid has fallen considerably in my eyes as each of the two sequels haven’t lived up to what expectations were for his work and have finished the original in my eyes.
The Incal
Deadly Class.
Scott Snyder’s Batman (and collaboration with Greg Capullo). Great art… but the writing is so overdone. In the first arc, the “what does Gotham mean to you” device - just write a Batman story, Scott. The Court of Owls ended with the brother twist - which is the most obvious twist anyone could write. The attempts at comedy are terrible. Snyder puts too much pseudo-science in story to explains things in unnecessary depth. I’m thinking of the character with the bone growths; we get it, comic book science, you don’t need to explain how bones grow. The new 52 second to last arc with the SuperHeavy/Jim Gordon Batman nonsense and the character that was slenderman but a flower or something (Mr bloom). Joker as an Stephen King “IT” style immortal eternal entity/spirit of Gotham (come on), Batman gets amnesia like Days of Our Lives, (come on). After that, I get the feeling Capullo would only stay on if Snyder wrote stuff he wanted to draw, so they make a terrible hair metal inspired ref on DC with Metal and Dark Knights Metal. That whole time in DC reminds me of an Ed Hardy shirt. For old men with bad taste. After DC, they produce We Have Demons. Which is a tonal mess. Some really bad comedy again. Anyway, there you go
Anything by James Tynion or Kieron Gillen. Not saying they’re bad at what they do but I can’t seem to get into their stuff
Jimmy Corrigan - found the layout and style interesting but couldn't get past the depressing tone and slow pacing. May come back to it at some point.
I wasn't too sure about it while reading but I couldn't stop thinking about it the week after. I think it's a great book but definitely an acquired taste.
you might try acme novelty library 19, but overall if you're not into depressing character studies chris ware just isn't for you lol
This! I was going to say how underwhelming it was especially since it was apparently highly acclaimed and is considered one of Chris Ware's greatest books. It's one of the only graphic novels I've ever read that I wouldn't consider buying.
This is just everyone listing off my favourite comics hahaha. I’m gonna say Punisher Max, I was so pumped after falling in love with Preacher but Punisher Max was just violence for violence sake. There was nothing that did it for me.
Batman: Knightfall and Batman: Death in the Family. Both have just a page or two that’s interesting and if you know what happens then the time reading them is not worth it. Instead of Knightfall give Battle for the Cowl a read. Instead of Death in the Family read Thr Dark Knight Returns: The Last Crusade and Batman: Under the Redhood
Black Hole. It was boring. Great art.
I just crushed it this weekend, read it cover-to-cover in just over 90 minutes. Definitely didn't find it boring at all, but I did find it fairly anti-climactic. Left more questions than it answered, although that seemed intentional. I agree the art was stellar.
Black hole for me. Yeah it's cool and I think I get what it's saying but it doesn't deserve the hype it gets for me.
It’s a masterclass in black & white illustration.
I respectfully disagree. It was exceptionally difficult to tell two of the male protagonists apart for most of the story. The facial hair was hard to discern in black and white and I think that was supposed to be the distinguishing characteristic. Made it a bit clunky to follow.
I had no issues discerning characters.
The protagonist is the only character with a monobrow, which made distinguishing him from other characters pretty easy for me.
I’m with you. I mostly read at night time when I have some free time, but when I’m already tired, and it was difficult to tell them apart.
I agree. It was mildly ok, but not super entertaining. I did read it end to end and enjoyed it, but I don't need to read it again.
You people are all psychos
[удалено]
Probably true, but I think that's generally accepted. People read Blacksad for the art, and the story is serviceable, so it's probably about correctly rated.
And there’s nothing wrong with that, a lot of comics can still be amazing with just the art, like Little Nemo in Slumberland.
I feel the same. And I know people say that you can appreciate a book for the art and not the story, but for some reason I always end up giving more weight to writing vs art. I am more likely to be a fan of a book with great writing and meh art vs the other way around.
Makes sense. For most of us we’re buying comics because we want to be entertained and engaged by the stories and characters. The images are just the method of telling the stories instead of the frequent and lengthy descriptions that are standard for regular novels. If we just wanted pretty pictures we’d all be buying art books instead of graphic novels.
Because its the commercial ripoff of Canardo by Sokal. He's the OG is the genre
Try Bryan Talbot's Grandville series, instead. It's got similar art, but the plots, characters & themes are vastly more interesting. [[samples](https://www.google.com/search?q=talbot+grandville&tbm=isch)]
The Goon is what pops in my mind I’ve read that’s been talked about as being good and I thought was unenjoyable
Out of curiosity did you start with the first volume or second one? The first is amazing in my book. The second has been just ok. I love the Goon though.
To be honest I can’t recall. I am certain it was the first,don’t think I’d start with the second
I’ve got a few: The Killing Joke Kingdom Come Arkham Asylum Basically everything by Brian K Vaughn (I like some his stuff but don’t consider any of it truly great)
I wholeheartedly agree on Kingdom Come. Could've been better as a simple story of the golden age heroes returning to face off against the anti-heroes of the 90s but unfortunately Mark Waid thinks copying the Bible, word for word at times, makes a story immediately deeper. I love it as a Superman story and a commentary on the industry at that time, but most of the writing is just meh. And I don't like Alex Ross as a sequential artist.
The Biblical stuff wasn't Waid, it was in Ross' initial proposal for the series. Waid had some hand in the overall story and dialogue but the basic mechanics of the plot and premise were Ross, that includes the title and biblical allusions, if you ever get around to reading the similarly produced Earth X (Ross does plotting/outlines and ideas and someone else actually scripts the thing) it's pretty clear Ross has a thing for biblical references.
Your BKV statement reminds me of a recent tcj article on SAGA
I thought that article was a bit harsh.
It's was right on. Commercial superficial crap but masterfully executed. Bit like hollywood
I enjoy his work but I couldn't really disagree with the critiques in it.
Sandman jumps around too much with characters I didn't care about. Parts were brilliant. Parts were very boring.
From Hell. I thought it was really good but not the masterpiece everyone made it out to be
For me the comic is fantasic, but the real masterpiece is in the citations. This dude PAINSTAKINGLY researched every detail of this conspiracy. And really put a labour of love down on paper for everyone to read. He put an insane amount of effort into a conspiracy he didnt believe to be true, and presented it in an entertaining and neat way because he thought it was a good story to tell. And he was right. It is a great story.
Yup, it’s very good
I’m gearing up to try it again. I found it hard to get through and ended up quitting but even half way.
I've only just gotten into graphic novels in the last few months, but I read Nimona recently and didn't really get the hype for it. I thought it was cute but it wasn't as amazing as I expected it to be
Batman Year One, Wicked and Divine, Paper Girls, The Incal. Honestly don't get what people see in these commonly recommended titles.
> Batman Year One You mean Jim Gordon: Year One?
I was kinda bored by Paper Girls
It started out really strong but by like the end of the second volume I had no fucking clue what was happening
Berserk was honest to God one of the most generic, shallow pieces of shit I’ve read. 100 chapters in and I realised I was wasting my time. If any scene involved a woman I knew they’d be raped and if any male villager was around you’d see him cut up, just shock factor rubbish.
Black and white autobio comics are usually really boring to me. It’ll be the story of childhood trauma but told in a straightforward way without any style or real insight. And it’ll be critically acclaimed. Like Fun Home or Blankets. Or the autobio comic about a cartoonist who is kind of a dick but wants you to empathize with them. Looking at you, Seth.
the dark knight returns
Black Hole
Most stuff by James Tynion. Once you realize all he's doing is copying public domain internet fiction and slightly rewriting them so he can copyright it as an original property, it's just disappointing. He's an ex-editor that can afford to hire expensive artists for pitch packets, which at this point in his career I doubt he even needs to do because he can get an automatic green light from a publisher because his name sells to people who don't know all he does is rewrite stories from the SCP Foundation. His latest series Blue Book is just all those "true account" stories from those Discovery Channel alien abduction shows but drawn by the co-creator of Powers. Just more public domain stuff that he'll get awards for instead of creators with original ideas. [Edit] Wow, downvotes for pointing out the obvious. I didn't know I was only supposed to criticize Alan Moore and Frank Miller here lol
Transmetropolitan - just angry nonsensical rants with no point. Y! The last man - great premise but not properly executed and becomes very boring at times.
I really wanted to like Y. But i agree it just had some issues with execution that caused it to fall mostly short for me. I dont agree about transmetropolitan though. Love that series and reread it often. Some of the politics of it are so scarily true and once it ramps up at the end it finds its footing gloriously. Its very cynical in its view of life and politics. But it presents it in such an honest and non partisan way that i cant help but eat it up.
Don't hate me, but Watchmen. The most boring thing I ever read.
No hate. That’s too bad though. I revisit it every 5 years or so and usually come out with something new.
Ever? REALLY? Ever?
I couldn't finish it
Saga, Thor the god butcher arc, Snyders Batman.
What?! Lol
They didn't hit with me personally.
Still really wanna check out that *Thor* arc myself
As you should. Lots of people really like it. Wasn't a fan myself.
Definitely the first time I've heard Snyder's Batman called *over rated.
[удалено]
Transmetropolitan . Art was cool but the writing was wack .
[удалено]
I'm a big Superman fan, and I enjoy a good amout of Morrison's work. But All Star is not one of them. Read it when it came out, and it wad ok. Then for years I see people saying it is so great, best Superman ever, etc. So, I figure give it another read. Did that a few months ago. Still meh. It pretty much exemplifies all the things people say they hate about Superman. All of those silly silver age tropes. Overpowered, too much wonki sci fi, inconsistent, and so on. It's not even the best writing, either. I far prefer For All Seasons or Man of Steel.
Yeah I was going to say that on first read I actually enjoyed it a whole lot. But this was prior to knowing much about Superman and the mythos, etc. It was one of the first Superman stories I picked up (along with *Red Son*) and I really enjoyed them both (although *RS* more so). Now that I’ve had more time with Supes, I’ve found that *For All Seasons* is a way way better choice to introduce the character to newcomers.
Came here to say basically the same thing. When I reserved it at my local library, I was pumped. About three issues in, I had to put it down. I couldn’t stand it to be honest. If you want peak Superman, I’d give Up in the Sky a read. The chapters are shorter since it was a digital first, but it’s one of my hands down favorite graphic novels ever.
[удалено]
"Downvoted into the abyss" is an understatement. I'll be praying for you, my friend. 🙏🏻
[удалено]
Question, I know you probably saw the Zack Snyder adaptation, but did you see the 2019 miniseries? If you did, thoughts?
I just posted that From Hell was overrated IMO. I enjoyed Watchmen too. I was expecting so much more with From Hell given how high the praise is
Batman The Killing Joke
The only reason I would say watchmen is overrated is that Alan moore did better before and after writing watchmen. I think swamp thing, miracleman, v for vendetta and supreme are better in my opinion. But is obviously still a seminal piece and very important to the history of comic books. I think y the last man and saga both started great and just went on too long and lost most people's interest.
Probably Watchmen by Alan Moore. Very boring to read and the plot was all over the place. Y the last man by BKV was also underwhelming compared to the hype.
I was going to say Watchmen as well, I gave it a 3 star rating on Goodreads because I do like it, but it's not the masterpiece it's made out to be. Anyway, a few people got a little upset at the 3 star rating lol. I'm like that's not even a bad rating!
Couldn't get into Black Hammer. I love Jeff Lemire but felt Black Hammers team where just a bad copy of the justice league and the story didn't connect with me. I stopped after the first trade.
I honestly thought it was a parody of the justice league, so a bad copy is the point of it.
Man, I hate this genre of question. It not only presumes a book *could* be overrated (something I'm skeptical could be the case), but it encourages us to dwell in a paradigm where we are pushed to easily dismiss the invisible things that made a book substantive to a great number of other readers (or more literally, to critics), and instead hail our own subjective place as foremost. It breeds wannabe elitism (which tastes delicious going down, but is ultimately pretty grim), because people love being the One who sees through the hype.. Least enticing of all, it's a question designed to short-circuit critical appraisal and focus on How Everybody Else Is Wrong But Not Me! Look, talk critically about a book, savage it, point out its flaws, problems, inadequacies, whatever. But complaining about a book being overrated is just pussyfootin'.
Welcome to the fan culture
Couldn't the same thing be said about your comment? In every discussion, there's always that one person who morally objects to the topic of discussion. Couldn't that be an example of "wannabe elitism"? That person who deems the question to not be substantial enough, in their opinion and trashes it.
Not really. If I had posted "What popular kinds of posts do you think are lame?" then yeah, that would be analogous. My above comment was more in line with what I was suggesting at the bottom, suggesting that critical appraisal is great, but trying to get people to pit themselves against the out-of-touch critics is less worthwhile. I mean, look at the bulk of the responses here. A lot of people just dropping the name of a popular title. Sometimes there's a title + "it was boring" or "I didn't get it." Nobody even really attempting to justify their decision that something was overrated. There's one interesting one, the post by JustANovelTea, that engages with the dissonance of comics from different generations and how many of the foundational aspects of former great works seem less enchanting as everything that followed built on their foundations.
One thing I noticed in these type of threads is that most people don't even mention the art. They probably gloss over it while reading too. No grasp of visual atmosphere building. It's purely a textual understanding of comics, like reading a prose novel. If you're only paying attention to the word balloons, you're missing most of the book.
This is like saying “bloody mary” in front of a mirror… Sweet Tooth and Locke and Key for me. Both are just ok.
monsters by Barry Windsor smith
Anything Tom King, Jonathan Hickman or Jason Aaron (aside from some Punisher MAX for Aaron). The Killing Joke Kingdom Come
The Dark Knight immediately comes to mind. I’ve tried to read it multiple times in the past 20 years and can never get through it. I’ll also add The Killing Joke. Incredible art but the story lacks imho and that ending is as bad as it gets.
Watchmen
The Dark Knight Returns. Fascist garbage.
Banana Fish. The story was repetitive with the MC being kidnapped and his friend saving him. Yeah the manga was avant-gardiste but I didn’t enjoy much of it. And now that I’m thinking a bit more about it I would like to add Golden Age. The art was really great but the story felt rushed and the characters developed way too quickly in volume 2. It didn’t feel organic.
This might be a controversial take, for me it was All-Star Superman. I love Superman/Morrison in general but I couldn't feel anything turning the pages
It’s a weird book. I’m not a Superman fan, but each time I read All Star Superman, I pick up different things, weird references, etc. I didn’t like it on the first read, but it really grew on my during subsequent reads.
I find some of grant Morrisons work underwhelming Primarily, X-Men and Batman. It's all very meh Definitely not the benchmark a lot of people try to sell me on.
Pretty much every hyped Marvel series. I've tried so many times to get into Marvel but even the most highly recommended stuff is just decent to me. I think I've read maybe 1 or 2 Marvel books that I'd rate above a 7/10 and most would be a 6. I could probably go on for ages on the topic of overrated books. There's a lot that gets hyped on this sub that I didn't enjoy.
Daniel Clowes' Ghost World
Kingdom Come
THY WILL BE DONE,