Tuesday, February 03, 2009

1993 sure had our number, didn't they?

Saw some scans of an old "Marvel: The Year In Review" article from 1993. My reactions :



Photobucket

Photobucket

Photobucket

Photobucket

Photobucket

Photobucket

2 comments:

Phil Watts, Jr. said...

They sure did.

It's funny how fans of today's comic fans love to rag on how bad the comics in the 90's were, yet the books they enjoy use the same tactics.

Instead of Liefeld swiping poses, you have an army of light-table 'artists' swiping celebrity faces and poses from magazines. You look at stuff like the critically acclaimed (for whatever reason) ULTIMATES, and what are they but an EXTREEEEME, more REEEEAL version of the Avengers. The 90's are criticizaed for it's overexposure of WOLVERINE, yet Wolverine is overexposed now more than ever, with him being in pretty much every team book there is. The 90's were also criticized for it's gratuitous violence and it's pointless crossover events...neither of which we are being inundated with every single WEEK, right?!

Then there's the issue with women, which you already covered. Let's put it this way: If the original writer of Top Cow's WITCHBLADE can do a better job of making Tigra a competent, heroic character than everybody currently working at Marvel combined (including Bendis, Millar and Slott), you know you have a problem.

jlbarnett said...

the third choice is ALWAYS fake right? I'm curious what Iron Man and Wolverine's Best are.

Though Bile strikes me as very slightly interesting.