What's your pick for the most overrated comic of all time?

What's your pick for the most overrated comic of all time?

52

Hilariously bad taste, gents.

The Killing Joke.

It's a fine story, but it's legacy is awful.

>but it's legacy is awful.
>oracle
>awful

The Dark Knight Returns

>using the term overrated seriously

That's thanks to Ostrander/Yale's Suicide Squad.

Anything and everything capeshit

Avengers

The Killing Joke story is paper thin shit, the narrative is basic and obvious. The true strengths of TKJ comes from Bolland's interior work and Higgin's original colors.

Bolland's back up was better written then Moore's main book.

52

Hush

DKR

Red Son

Good things are going to happen in this thread, I can tell.

Oracle was a diamond in the ruff. What The Killing Joke's legacy mainly consists of stories where writers decided for the umpteenth time to explore Batman and Joker's relatioship and substitute substance in the Joker's plans for the style of make it dark, gritty, and throw in a lot of gore. The Killing Joke briefly explored a different facet of Joker and now no one else wants to do anything different.

I got bored and quit I Kill Giants about half way through. A lot of people seem to really like that one.

Vision/The Omega Men/Sheriff of Babylon/Justice League: Darkside Wars Green Lantern

Pick one.

your favorite book.

DKR

Alias

THE TURN

Saga

Tower of Babel

Shit taste.

Truth

Hellboy.
Such a boring comic that is only sustained by its admittedly good art.
Literally the only time I wasn't bored by it was the Goon crossover and that's only because Goon is actually good.

Bring the hate
But The Killing Joke wasn't that good. I love a lot of Moore stuff but this seemed lazy. Maybe it is because i didn't read it at the time but The Joker wasn't all that special. The last laughng page was great though

This

It was new and original for it's time. Then everyone and their mother decide to ape it, so unless The Killing Joke is one of the first comics with Joker that you've read it'll come off as just a simplistic Joker story.

This, overrated is the most empty criticism there is. Literally the only thing it says is that you're a hipster trying to feel superior for not liking something popular.

>ruff

Dissagree but it is one of those edgy books that tried to fit into Marvel. For better or worse. Still one of my fav marvel books

I read Morrisons Arkam Asylum first and it is still my fav batman or joker comic. So that probably ruined it for me. Dave McKean is a fucking genious

what are people smoking when they suck this comic's cock?

Pfhahahaha

This on Sup Forums

Off Sup Forums it's Saga or The Killing Joke

Fuck off.
The only worthwhile thing about Mignolaverse is BPRD. Wake me up when Hellboy has something that comes close to being as good as Plague of Frogs.

Oh you

TDKR, easily

Quality post as expected of Hellboyfags.

I agree, anyone who liked GC had horrible tastes.

Kingdom Come is nothing but a fucking cameofest and a series of stiff but well rendered paintings

Also a shit book to recommend to newcomers

Well idk about "of all time," but I heard Superior Foes of Spider-Man was hilarious but I read the first volume and found it pretty boring

>hating Bolland

there are no words for how wrong that is

This. Tom King is a maudlin faggot.

So Sup Forums judges comic only on the prose?

This.

If the prose is bad but the art is good it means that the book isn't all it could be, and the same is true vis versa.

I, for example, can't get into The Walking Dead because I can't stand the art.

ah ha ha oh wow

Definitely Kingdom Come

every other answer but Saga and TKJ in this thread are just being contrarian for the sake of it

>just being contrarian for the sake of it
either that or
>shit taste

I bet you're one of those "Max Landis writes such a good Superman" type of faggots.

I don't know why you decided to slap that last sentence in there

All-Star Superman. It's a good comic, but nowhere near what everyone makes it out to be.

ASHoSE is pretty weak the Batman/Joker interactions and the Arkham backstory.

I kinda agree with you about all star superman

Civil War

ASS has a couple of problems: it's geared entirely towards a specific type of Silver Age Superman story, it requires a very specific level of knowledge of Silver Age Superman - too little and you miss out on a lot, too much and you've read it all before, and revolves entirely around Grant Morrison's mythological interpretation of Superman. Basically if you're not really into early Curt Swan stories filtered through a Jesus allegory it's not going to resonate as much.

>Jesus allegory
>how to tell someone didn't get it
>even though Morrison practically spelled it out

thread/

Watchmen. Moore's worst, a preachy, shit comic that tries to be clever in the most pedestrian ways possible. Yet for some unbelievable reason enshrined as the pinnacle of the medium.

the real reason it's held up as a pinnacle is that it's a masterpiece in visual storytelling

Casuals of course don't really care about art, so most of the praise is for the story

and Moore's worst is still Neonomicon

Are you saying you can stand the writing?

What's So Funny About Truth, Justice & the American Way?, is full of superman wankery, and whining about current comics, with totally no the Authority as the the one dimensional antagonists.

On Sup Forums?

Animal Man

Grant Morrison pulls from a great deal of mythological sources, including Christianity. His structure is Paul Bunyan and Hercules, his themes are Jesus with a bit of classical sun gods thrown in.

If all you have to say about Watchmen is Moore, then you actually have no idea what you are talking about.

>Moore's worst
If we're just focusing on writing itself, there's plenty of others to pick from.

It's already been posted a few times in this thread.

Your favorite comic

This I can agree with.

>the real reason it's held up as a pinnacle is that it's a masterpiece in visual storytelling
But it's not that either, though. DKR or Sandman (to name two comics from roughly the same era) might deserve that title, but Watchmen is literally just standard unenthusiastic '80s-cape shitwork with added autism from Moore.

And Neonomicon has a recovering sex addict getting degradingly raped by a Deep One, so it doesn't matter that the story's dreck.

>Watchmen is literally just standard unenthusiastic '80s-cape shitwork
Jesus wept

Sandman, writing was great, but art was for the most par subpar.

Are you saying Gibbons is even close to being a standout artist? He draws like someone working on that period's Batman ongoing; very close to Aparo, for instance.

This is in a decade that saw Miller, P. Craig Russell, and European masters like Hugo Pratt at the height of their powers. Fuck's sake, even Bisley was doing hot stuff back then. Similarly, for cape art across the decades you have guys like (again) Miller, Kirby, Mignola, Cooke, and even Timm who do great work with dynamic, individual styles.


TL:DR There is absolutely no way that you can defend bog-standard '80s cape art with added Alan Moore autism as some sort of masterpiece.

You're critiquing the art style, not the actual art and storytelling.

I wouldn't stop there. Almost everything BKV writes is overrated.

>You're critiquing the art style, not the actual art
What the hell are you even talking about, I mentioned guys with great quality art AND individual styles whereas Gibbons has neither.

>and storytelling
Which I already addressed e.g. it's Moore's worst.

Was he the guy on Ex Machina? I thought that started out great, but then it turned to shit.

And Y: The Last Man too, come to think of it...

Ex Machina is a character study, not an adventure tale.

Is it safe to call Y: The Last Man a good premise with a completely trash execution and a pretty good ending? That used to get me (You)ed to death on Sup Forums

I'd put Saga above Y.

>Sandman might deserve that title
Sandman is the most prime example of prose carrying middling art, especially for the first few arcs. Sandman is solely Gaiman's work, for better or for worse. If Gaiman was a better writer, Sandman could've easily been a novel.

>literally just standard unenthusiastic '80s-cape shitwork
It's literally not though. Gibbons meticulously crafted a work unique to the medium of comics through the use of minute background details, repeated visual motifs, paneling structures, among other examples. Watchmen works as a comic, and as a comic alone, the same experience cannot be properly portrayed by any other medium in the manner Moore/Gibbons intended.

>Miller, Kirby, Mignola, Cooke, and even Timm who do great work with dynamic, individual styles.
There's nothing inherently wrong with a unique personal style, but there's nothing inherently superior about a unique personal style either. It's simply different, and such superficial differences tend to boil down to personal preference anyways.

you're a fucking moron. Watchmen's use of color, paneling, and covers as part of the storytelling alone are some of the best in comics, and that's leaving aside stuff like Fearful Symmetry

like shit, the FIRST PAGE is so meticulous with tying the art to the words it still blows me away

Watchmen.

This really shouldn't even be open to debate.

No matter how much you like it the idea that it's "IRREFUTABLY THE BEST COMIC EVER" is ridiculous.

It really pissed me off that the series pretty much promised a look at the consequences of basically a novel apocalypse/post-apoc scenario and instead it becomes a save-the-world quest that's super tired.

>Watchmen's use of color, paneling, and covers as part of the storytelling alone are some of the best in comics, and that's leaving aside stuff like Fearful Symmetry
>actually believing this

I feel like we've effectively already agreed that you're the moron here. Aside from the fact that none of that shit you mentioned enhances or really even is part of the storytelling, thinking that kind of shit's more important than a comic actually having good art is mind-blowingly pretentious. You're so stupid it makes me wish I was just falling for bait, even though I know I'm not.

Y the Last Man has the same problem that X-Files and the later Harry Potter series had which is the plot had so many twists and red herrings that when I look back I can't even remember (or care) what the real answer to the mystery turned out to be.

Sup Forums doesn't understand the concepts of "story" or "world building" and thinks "writing" literally means "dialogue".

I think enough time has passed that we can finally say that Starman is overrated.

lol jk this comic is the best shit ever and there's no excuse for you to not be reading it right now

>>and storytelling
>Which I already addressed e.g. it's Moore's worst.
The strength of comics over other mediums emerges when the art and the prose work in tandem to elevate the plot, narrative, story, and all other elements of the work. If you think Moore is the sole storyteller of Watchmen, you've fundamentally failed at assessing and analyzing the comic as it was meant to be read, and how all comics should be read.

holy crap you actually don't know how to read comics

my excuse is that they stopped the paperback reprints

>he doesn't know about Alan Moore's immensely pedantic panel-by-panel scripts essentially designed to take the artist out of the equation as an individual contributor because of this exact circumstance

>coloring and paneling doesn't contribute to storytelling
Why the fuck do you read comics? Why don't you read literature and then later look at artwork, if you actually believe that the prose and the art together don't contribute to each other?

Why does Sup Forums always love to talk about things that are overrated? It's probably one of the meaningless things to determine. A 8/10 comic that is treated like a 9/10 comic is overrated. It has nothing to do with the actual content and everything to do with you not liking that other people like the comic.

any writer worth half a shit collaborates closely with their artists

I honestly believe it's so we can call each other out on shit opinions

TDKR

I don't get it. Why was this so acclaimed?

I didn't hate Promethea. It was fine. I'm not looking to rag on it. I just don't understand why it got such glowing praise from critics as if it reinvented the medium.

Gibbons himself came up with the idea of using the nine panel structure in Watchmen, and that's just the most obvious example of artist autonomy in the work. Even basic research into the topic shows that Watchmen was a collaboration between writer, artist, and colorist.

This desu

Right, which is why it's telling that Moore, a shit writer, instead writes insanely detailed instructions for his artists and loses his shit at them if they deviate even a little, dictatorially ordering the artist around instead of collaborating with him.

Paneling is one of the core and most basic elements of sequential storytelling.

You clearly don't know THE first fucking thing about the craft of comics, so fuck off and stick to reading them you retarded pleb.

At that point the MUH GENIUS MOORE meme was thoroughly established and he could've published a bucket of his own vomit and still gotten glowing reviews for reinventing the medium.