Comic Book Resources

ULTIMATES DISS FOR THE WIN!

Solid strip.

Ha!

That relationship would only end in tears, Josh. And possibly cannibalism.

Perhaps Josh would have better luck if he had access to a time machine, so he could go back about five or so years and find a woman who actually likes Jeph Loeb's comics because they're good ( as opposed to now, where the best he could hope for is a girlfriend who likes their superhero comics " audaciously and entertainingly bad " ).

Trying not to laugh out loud at work!

Perhaps Josh would have better luck if he had access to a time machine, so he could go back about five or so years and find a woman who actually likes Jeph Loeb’s comics because they’re good ( as opposed to now, where the best he could hope for is a girlfriend who likes their superhero comics ” audaciously and entertainingly bad ” ).

This is my cue to come in and make my typical Loeb-bashing statements:

Jeph Loeb's writing was never any good. Not five years ago, not ten.

Compared to everything else that came out in the mid-to-late 90s, Loeb's writing at the time might appear deceivingly good ... but don't let that fool you. Even in the deep, dark 90s, writers like Waid and Busiek ran circles around Loeb.

This comic? Awesome.

The last panel, just standing on its own, may even be funnier without the set up. It would make a decent t-shirt.

I think the barista is kinda sweet on Josh.

Sweet!

This was a really good strip. Made me laugh out loud. Wondered where it was going and the final panel just sold it.

I will however defend two Jeph Loeb projects--the three Legends of the Dark Knight Halloween Specials that preceeded the Long Halloween and Superman: A Man for All Seasons. I thought all of these were excellent. Beyond that, his work is a mixture of enjoyable but forgettable and too painful to even finish.

This is my cue to come in and make my typical Loeb-bashing statements:

Jeph Loeb’s writing was never any good. Not five years ago, not ten.

DAMN!

Someone beat me to it!

Oh wait, there's still another chance...

I will however defend two Jeph Loeb projects–the three Legends of the Dark Knight Halloween Specials that preceeded the Long Halloween and Superman: A Man for All Seasons. I thought all of these were excellent.

No, those sucked as well. They were just better as disguising the suck.

Can some of the regulars here PLEASE find a new track to play? It's getting really tiresome...

Although I am always amused by " No, those sucked as well. They were just better as disguising the suck." It really comes across as "He never wrote anything good. The ones that WERE good really weren't good. See, my point is made! Ta daaaa!"

Very funny strip!

For what it's worth, I liked Loeb and sale's first Challengers of the Unknown mini...

But I also thought the strip was funny. Great job, guys!

Bah! Jeph Loeb is great. It is YOU who are the suck.

Is there really a meaningful distinction between goodness and extremely well-disguised suck?

Can some of the regulars here PLEASE find a new track to play? It’s getting really tiresome…

I agree. I too am sick of hearing regulars come in with the "Jeph Loeb was once an excellent writer, what happened to him?" track. It is quite tiresome indeed...

Personally, I liked the Yoko line.

All I've read from Loeb in the last five years or so was ULTIMATES 3. I got all five issues for free and still feel liked I got robbed. At least they teamed him up with a bad artist, so Hitch didn't have to draw that mess.

As for beating new drums ... has it been long enough since Chuck Austen wrote anything that we can call bashing him "nostalgia"? I just read a few of his UNCANNY X-MEN issues for the first time ... it was like he was reaching through time to suck all the more ....

I think they've got a point about the barista; I've never had one actually bring my coffee over to me like this one does.

Poor Chuck Austen. The guy wasn't even in the crosshairs in this CC strip and yet he still ends up getting bashed (two comments above this one).

And doesn't that Rob Liefeld suck as well! Let's not forget!!! Without eternal vigilance, crappy creators will continue to make sucky comics!

Do your part!

Is there really a meaningful distinction between goodness and extremely well-disguised suck?

Goodness stands the test of time; well-disguised suck strikes you as great until you grow older and/or spend a meaningful amount of time digesting what you've seen.

Case in point: Todd McFarlane's work on adjectiveless Spider-Man. I thought it was brilliant when it came out, but then, I was 12 at the time.

I am anxious to hear more examples of "well-disguised suck," though.

"For what it’s worth, I liked Loeb and sale’s first Challengers of the Unknown mini…

But I also thought the strip was funny. Great job, guys!"

I also like BATMAN: the Halloween specials, The Long Halloween, Dark Victory and Catwoman: When in Rome.

Ditto on today's strip.

Is there a Craigslist for Canadian?

Goodness stands the test of time; well-disguised suck strikes you as great until you grow older and/or spend a meaningful amount of time digesting what you’ve seen.

Yeah, a lot of stuff you read when you are younger turns out to actually suck when you look at it with a more informed, matured perspective. There are movies like that, also.

Case in point: When I was little, I actually thought Return of the Jedi was a great movie. Why wouldn't I? It's got TEDDY BEARS WITH SPEARS! When I finally got the Star Wars movies on VHS, I realized most of it wasn't that great for many of the same reasons I thought it was great as a kid. Why? Well, it has teddy bears with spears.

Yet I still think Star Wars & Empire are beyond awesome. That's Goodness.

Return of the Jedi? Well-disguised suck.

I still think the first half of Jedi when they're on Tattoine is good. I'm with you on the ewoks, though.

I don't care what anyone says, I still like Commando.

I don’t care what anyone says, I still like Commando.

Me too. But it had a cowriter, so I blame anything good on him.

I like how it looks like Josh comes in walking towards the table with his hand up ready to take his usual. The first two panels look like he does it in one motion without even acknowledging the barista. It speaks to his character's often blithe self-absorption.

I feel obligated to mention the sexism apparent in the idea that a woman appearing in only two panels in the history of strip (as far as I know) is seen as having a crush on the main character. Not to attack or make anybody feel bad, but it's something to watch out for.

Also, this was definitely a 'know your audience' gag!

I thought that barista was a guy.

Jesus, Dan, I was kidding.

i don't get why Loeb is considered the literary equivalent of Liefeld. It makes me sad

Is it that i'm missing his sucky comics or do people think stuff like Long Hallowe'en and Fallen Son suck? I've never read anything by Loeb I didn't like, I didn't realise i was a minority! Come on guys, spill! What's Loeb's equivalent of Liefeld's massive chested Cap? I want to know!

What’s Loeb’s equivalent of Liefeld’s massive chested Cap?

Tommy Elliot as Hush.

Other Dan: I think he's waving hello/reaching for the chair in that panel.

Brad: Maybe it's a guy with a crush on Josh. Hmm...

malenkym: I was in the same boat as you were a while back. The only Leob I'd ever read was Superman/Batman and I thought they were a hoot. Then I started reading comic blogs and found out that it's everyone's job to hate Loeb. And then I read Ultimates 3. AND NOW I KNOW.

I hate Jeph Loeb more than I hate manga. So, solid strip. Me GETS it, me laugh.

As an aside ... her's one of KRONDOR'S FASCINATING FACTS!

Translated into english, Kozure Okami means "Lone Wolf and Cub."

Translated into english, Kozure Okima means "Big Homosexual and Cub."

It's a fact!

You heard it from Krondor! (VIA Me! Which is not a slogan for a Slovenian soft-drink.)

" Tommy Elliot as Hush. "

What was so bad about that? I enjoyed Hush, and I liked Tommy Elliot as the main physical threat ( with Riddler as the mastermind ). It wasn't great, but it was enjoyable, and not even as well-disguised suck, but just as a fairly straightforward action story that brought in a bunch of villains as drawn by Jim Lee. Sometimes I want that, guilty pleasure or not.

"What’s Loeb’s equivalent of Liefeld’s massive chested Cap?"

Ultimates 3.

Seriously, though I loathe his current stuff (though Rulk is, I suppose "stupidly readable" the kindest thing I can say about any of this latter-day stuff), and certainly consider the supposed "classic Loeb" stuff like Long Halloween to be massively overrated, I wouldn't go as far as to say that it out-an-out sucks.
But then, the lack of grey areas between "awesome" and "sucks" is my main online fanboy behaviour pet peeve, even more than that old boogie man, entitlement.

Ahh, you see, I don't read Ultimates I think i'll continue staying away then and stay on the side of Loeb I like

Is nobody looking forward to Cap: White then? I am, rather childishly excited in fact!

"But then, the lack of grey areas between “awesome” and “sucks” is my main online fanboy behaviour pet peeve, even more than that old boogie man, entitlement."

This should be framed somewhere.

@malenkym
An attempt to answer your question:

I have to admit not reading everything Loeb's written, but I thought his Challengers work was great, his two big Batman books were enjoyable.
Personally, I'd say the wheels began to fall off with those Marvel "color" series (like Spider-man: Blue), which just leave me cold. I get from them that they are supposed to be iconic retellings of classic stories, but they aren't nearly as good as the original stories and just come off like vanity projects to me.

Can't say anything about Superman-Batman because I never read an issue. Man for All Seasons either.

Ultimates 3 is probably the thing I most dislike, because it's loud, obnoxious, and just seems gratuitous with the violence and shock stuff. It's not at all subtle, and in-your-face-grim-and-grittiness doesn't make this comic mature or well-written. More like a 12-year-old's version of what mature is. I am not kewl enough to like it.

The Rulk stuff seems off to because it has a Mary Sue villain doing lots of cool things because he is the author's new favorite toy. Plus, the characters in the story don't act like they have in say, oh, the past 20 years of characterization (though Loeb is hardly alone on that note). I think Loeb is having fun with that series though, and that redeems it a little, as did the McGuiness and Art Adams art.

Ultimatum is also dialed up to 11, like the last two series I mentioned, but it reads to me like an extended What If? story and somehow it doesn't grate on me so much because I just think of it as that. Plus, I haven't read any Ultimate series outside of the 2 Millar-Hitch ones, so I have no great attachment to the characters...

That's more than I thought I'd write, but I hope it's helpful :p

this strip sucks

Jeph Loeb’s writing was never any good. Not five years ago, not ten.

But twenty five years ago?

TEEN WOLF RULED!

But twenty five years ago?

TEEN WOLF RULED!

He had a co-writer on that as well named Matthew Weisman. Weisman was also Loeb's co-writer on Commando.

Again, I blame all the good stuff on him.

You know, bash Liefeld all you want but I think the guy may officially be the last very influential writer Marvel has ever had as far as debuting characters with staying power. Jim Lee's inventions mostly by the wayside. Gambit goes years on end without appearing. But Liefeld's creations Deadpool and Cable are consistently getting award ongoing series and miniseries. And Deadpool's getting a feature film. And now Heroes Reborn Bucky is getting a series and a major role in Brubaker's Cap!

" But then, the lack of grey areas between “awesome” and “sucks” is my main online fanboy behaviour pet peeve, even more than that old boogie man, entitlement. "

Thank you for saying this. Everyone who goes onto an internet forum should have this tattooed on the back of their hands.

By the way, my least favorite Loeb work was Dardevil: Yellow. Not only was it a tribute devoid of original content, but a tribute to a version of the character before all his interesting developments. Especially when Yellow manages to completely excise all traces of Frank Miller's backstory additions...

Thanks Sterg! i take it you're not looking forward to Cap White, then? I never read Spidey blue etc but i think that's because the love interest side of the superhero story is usually kinda lame. Am looking forward to the Cap and bucky relationship in this series though

And T, Cable and Deadpool thrived so well in their 50 issue series becasue of the LACK of Liefeld's presence, as far as I'm xoncerned. i know its hating on Liefeld is the bandwagon mainstay, but come on!

Oh, sure, no offense intended, Michael P--it was just a case of synchronicity: last night I saw the Star Trek episode where Picard becomes a Borg. It's got a headstrong woman vying for Riker's job, and I was waiting the whole time for them to fall in love (they didn't, so good for the show). It just occurred to me how often I see a woman introduced solely as a love interest, which is sexist of the show, and it's awfully sexist of me to expect it.

For what it's worth, I thought the barista was the other recurring female character in the strip. (The only major difference in art style is that the barista has lighter hair than that character.)

No one here realizes that that barista was DEAD two years ago??? AND was married to Josh!!! And now there she is, alive and bringing him coffee! Where is the uproar?

Ah, the Comics Should Be Good groupthink that apparently doesn't exist.

Jeph Loeb’s writing was never any good. Not five years ago, not ten.

No, but twenty years ago (ish) he wrote the excellent Challengers of the Unknown.

No, but twenty years ago (ish) he wrote the excellent Challengers of the Unknown.

Never heard of that one, but I did read an extremely crappy Challengers of the Unknown by Loeb and Sale.

I only brought up Chuck Austen because I remember him being fairly well-received at first, then promoted to Lord of All Suck soon after. And his UNCANNY *was* terrible. And anybody remember RAVAGE 2099? Stan Lee sucks! Bwah hah hah!

And I'm with malenkym on this one: as I understand it, Liefeld's contributions to his better-known characters were largely visual. The staying power of Cable and Deadpool is mostly due to Fabian Nicieza, who is probably the best writer in comics when it comes to sewing silk purses out of sow's ears.

As for Loeb ... I forgot he did FALLEN SON. That was decent, so I guess I should give credit where it's due. I'll tread that nonexistent middle ground between "awesome!" and "sucks!"

I think Loeb's better work could largely be attributed to his artist, usually Tim Sale. Those Halloween specials just looked so magical, it was a lot easier to buy into the story. This happens a lot with comics. To this day people still rave about Kingdom Come as if it was a great story. But would they think that if the artist was Liefeld? I don't think so.

In a related note. What if Maduiera was the artist for Ultimates since the beginning? Would people have swallowed Millar's in your face style? Or would they have been disgusted with suggestion of incest between the Maximoff's a lot earlier? I haven't seen anything in Ultimates 3 that isn't a continuation of the game of "shock equals cool" that Millar established. Millar had the Hulk eat people, Pym spray his wife with Raid, and suggested the incestuous relationship to begin with. Hitch's job was to take all that and make it look smart and classy.

As for Nicieza, he always seems to be taking over properties after more popular creators are done with them. Sometimes it works, often it doesn't.

Ah, the Comics Should Be Good groupthink that apparently doesn?t exist.

No offense, Graeme, but a lot of people all over the Internet and in "real life" think Loeb is a terrible writer, and certainly many people who posted above cited examples of work that they like by him.

It isn't exactly groupthink when people are openly and frequently disagreeing with others. Nor is it groupthink for me to state "I think Jeph Loeb is a terrible writer" and T & others agree with me.

Nitz said:What was so bad about that? I enjoyed Hush, and I liked Tommy Elliot as the main physical threat ( with Riddler as the mastermind ). It wasn’t great, but it was enjoyable, and not even as well-disguised suck, but just as a fairly straightforward action story that brought in a bunch of villains as drawn by Jim Lee. Sometimes I want that, guilty pleasure or not.

The problem with "Hush" as an arc was that you didn't actually get much of what you've just described. The Riddler was barely in the damn story until the rather strained reveal he was the mastermind, which amounted to four pages of exposition and a hook ("I know the secret!") deemed so character-harming that it was quietly thrown away as soon as possible.

Similarly, "Hush as physical threat" was mostly backburnered so that the truly crappy alleged mystery plot about his identity could play out. The things you're saying you liked in "Hush," thanks to its botched story structure and general flimsiness, weren't actually in "Hush."

I agree that Jim Lee getting to draw pretty much all the iconic Bat-related characters was fun, but frankly I'd have preferred an honest pin-up book.

T said:Gambit goes years on end without appearing.

Errr...which years were those, exactly?

And anybody remember RAVAGE 2099? Stan Lee sucks! Bwah hah hah!

I dunno. I liked it. No one wants to read my Ravage 2009 pitch, though. *sob*

Errr…which years were those, exactly?

There were long stretches of time where he didn't seem to be appearing anywhere, at least in main books. One such stretch I can think of was during the years of New X-Men/Casey and Austen's Uncanny/X-Statix era. There were other eras after Morrison's run where he doesn't seem to be appearing anywhere.

" There were long stretches of time where he didn’t seem to be appearing anywhere, at least in main books. One such stretch I can think of was during the years of New X-Men/Casey and Austen’s Uncanny/X-Statix era. There were other eras after Morrison’s run where he doesn’t seem to be appearing anywhere. "

Depends on whether or not you considered X-Treme X-Men to be a main book, I suppose. I didn't, nor did I consider Chuck Austen or Peter Milligan's X-Men main books, and I don't think of X-Men Legacy as the main book. The argument isn't so much that Gambit is AWOL, but that he's relegated to the fringes of the X-Books.

Which is good, because the important stuff is unencumbered by his suck.

@geekmobster: I see what you're saying about Hitch bringing a level of class to THE ULTIMATES that it may not have otherwise possessed. Millar has always seemed to like playing "Mad Mark" as much as writing actual stories, but he was capable of subtlety on occasion. (There was the SUGGESTION of incest; Loeb all but had Wanda blow him on camera.) I never saw anything approaching subtlety in U3, and how much of that was due to Loeb and how much to JoeMad is anyone's guess. Comics being the collaborative medium that they are, there's no way of knowing.

As for Nicieza taking over for more poular creators, he's certainly the go-to man at Marvel for that sort of thing. He's not flashy, and he's got his share of annoying tics, but he's a solid, dependable writer.

Mr. Bloom,
All that you said is very true.

U3 really does make explicit what the other Ultimate series left as implicit. Still, Loeb is merely playing the game that Millar is playing, with less subtlety, like you said.

After all, what else is he to do? Millar sold his Ultimates as being more shocking, more daring, and more "adult" than the original Avengers. And it isn't as if "adult" here meant a thoughtful and insightful examination of complex characters and situations. No, "adult" meant to break taboos, or "push the envelope". The problem with that, is the next guy now has less taboos to break.

As mainstream Avengers book, doesn't have a cannibal hulk or incestuous Maximoffs or even a Pym quite that sadistic or Avengers that gungho and violent, Millar can has room for subtlety and still can be shocking.

The only way Loeb can be shocking is to up the stakes further.

Also, has anyone considered that all this excessive bad-assery and tabloid style sensationalism might be there because of editorial interference? The presence of Wolverine suggests the possibility.

I'll agree with Omar on the points about Hush. It was a mystery that the reader couldn't figure out because they weren't given the all the pieces.

The Riddler's behind it.
Why?
Because he had Cancer.
When did that happen?
Oh, we didn't mention it until now.
WTF?

Also, the main part of the plan revolves around Tommy planting a chip in Bruce's skull, which relies entirely on Hush's shot that severs the batline, dropping Bruce into the ally in such a way that he gets the exact injury that requires Tommy's skills to fix it. Ummm.... yeah.

@Nitz: ah, that must be it. The books Gambit was in during those periods I wasn't reading.

Geekmobster --

That first line alone shows you to be a correspondent of exquisite taste and uncanny judgment. Salut, mon capitan.

ULTIMATES really was supposed to be AUTHORITY with Marvel characters, and I thought Millar sold that exceptionally well. There was another route to go, though, besides just upping the sex and violence, though without a doubt "upping the sex and violence" seems to be the order of the day for Marvel. When it works (X-STATIX) it's great, though it's interesting that that book, perhaps the best example of a Marvel book cranking things up to 11, was intended largely as a metajoke.

As in so many things, we're still trying to catch up to Alan moore. WATCHMEN was an adult comic; its sex, violence, and general grimness was what was needed to tell the story, and it did it exceptionally well. Most comics trying to use that formula -- and I include all three volumes of ULTIMATES -- use sex, violence and general grimness in order to have more sex, violence, and general grimness. I'm not the biggest Alan Moore fan in the world, but he did it right where so many have failed since. Jeph Loeb, alas, didn't.

@Omar; to further discuss the merits or lack thereof of the Hush story, I'd like to take it to a more on-topic place, like the Alvaro Bat-Board or the CSBG forum proper. We'll meet with pistols ( or at least keyboards and opinions ) at dawn!

@T.; You weren't alone. While the X-Books are hardly unprofitable for Marvel these days, the fact that they had so many of them and had only one or two with any actual promotion or significance from Marvel ( Morrison's X-Men, then Whedon's, now debatably Fraction's ) is one of the reasons why the Avengers replaced them as Marvel's golden goose.

No offense, Graeme, but a lot of people all over the Internet and in “real life” think Loeb is a terrible writer, and certainly many people who posted above cited examples of work that they like by him.

None taken. I merely find it fascinating how the very mention of Loeb (or Brad Meltzer, the other fave CSBG target) can turn people into shouty, newsarama reading neaderthals time after time and when people say "I like him" or "he once was good" it only increases the kneejerk reactions from otherwise insightful people as they shout them down. It's nice to know that comic book fans live up to the stereotype.

Ah, my favorite Internet debating tactic: branding an entire community as frothing lunatics so you can then pat yourself on the back for being a cooler nerd than they are.

Ah, the Comics Should Be Good groupthink that apparently doesn’t exist.

FINALLY!

You kept throwing around the insulting "groupthink" term so much I was quite irritated by it, but I'm glad you've finally come around and admitted that it doesn't exist.

Thank you, Graeme, I appreciate it greatly.

None taken. I merely find it fascinating how the very mention of Loeb (or Brad Meltzer, the other fave CSBG target) can turn people into shouty, newsarama reading neaderthals time after time and when people say “I like him” or “he once was good” it only increases the kneejerk reactions from otherwise insightful people as they shout them down. It’s nice to know that comic book fans live up to the stereotype.

What stereotype is that? Fans who like vigorous debate about the quality of a product? Yeah, only comic fans fit that horrible stereotype, along with 98% of all other fans of all other media.

Ah, my favorite Internet debating tactic: branding an entire community as frothing lunatics so you can then pat yourself on the back for being a cooler nerd than they are.

Now this...THIS is a good example of a comic book fan stereotype.

What stereotype is that? Fans who like vigorous debate about the quality of a product? \

I was thinking of the compulsive need to sound like an idiot who has to get his point across no matter what, but whatever works for you.

"the compulsive need to sound like an idiot"

Whether or not these people DO sound like idiots, surely they do not NEED to sound like idiots, or even WANT to sound like idiots.

Groupthink is where many people have an opinion but as NO-ONE says it (because they think everyone else doesn't believe the same) then it seems like no-one has the opinion. Show me ONE thread about Loeb where NO-ONE says something good about him and I'll agree there's groupthink. Groupthink must be silent. Groupthink =/= loud disagreement.

I actually like Dark Halloween. But I'm willing to admit that I have a minority opinion, and not pretend that everyone agrees with me and just aren't willing to admit it.

I was thinking of the compulsive need to sound like an idiot who has to get his point across no matter what, but whatever works for you.

Really Graeme, don't be so hard on yourself. You're not that bad!

By the way, why didn't you get on the Liefeld and Austen bashers in this thread as well? To me they're much more guilty of groupthink and beating a dead horse than I am. At least there is some debate on both sides of the argument regarding Loeb and Meltzer while I've never seen anyone defend Liefeld or Austen in any threads.

Why do you single out Meltzer and Loeb bashers?

Also Graeme, every time we say that Loeb was never great, it's always in response to people who wonder why he was once great but no longer is. They say their end of the script, we say ours. So why are we the only one guilty of "groupthink" and beating a dead horse? It takes two to tango. They make the same point over and over, we make the same counterpoint over and over.

Personally, I think groupthink and repeating the same point over and over only bothers you when its something you personally dfind offensive.

We better stop now or else we will be guilty of Anti-Graeme Burk groupthink.

I was thinking of the compulsive need to sound like an idiot who has to get his point across no matter what, but whatever works for you.

I'd point out that the above doesn't have anything to do with the notion of "groupthink," but I think it's increasingly clear Graeme likes words he read somewhere else and vaguely understands mean something bad. Tune in tomorrow when he calls everyone "antidisestablishmentarian." When the big words don't work, he casts around blindly for his next pejorative and settles, of course, on something as blunt and content-free as "idiot" like Mark Millar working a close scripting deadline.

Jesus, Graeme, you can't even bitch about Internet posters competently. That's like needing directions to masturbate, only without the shameful trip to the emergency room after Yahoo! Answers perma-bans you for spamming. Or as Graeme calls it, how he spent his summer vacation.

Maybe I'm not being fair to Graeme here, using long sentences and full paragraphs and other things that make him tired, and cranky, and confused when he tries reading them. But on the upside, no one can turn around and accuse Graeme of "groupthink," since he's got no friends and doesn't appear to think.

(The above is meant entirely in jest, except for the parts where I'm insulting Graeme Burk.)

I have unsubscribed from this thread; I should have done so 50 posts ago. Sometimes this site can really use a moderator...

To be honest... I actually like CSBG for the non-groupthink mentality, which is why I was so surprised that the term came up here. I've seen a lot of well-written responses in these here comments, even if I totally disagree with them.

Personally I just keep going after the Loeb thing because so many people say "well he used to be good" although, in my opinion, the weaknesses that fans recognize *now* are there in his older work, so I can't quite understand why the majority of fans seemed to have turned on him only now. So, my big question always is, how is something that suffers from huge, gaping plot holes like Hush "good" while something that suffers from huge, gaping plot holes like Ultimatum is "bad"?

But obviously enough people *must* like Loeb's writing (or at least Sale and Lee's art), or else he wouldn't have his 3 major Batman projects in Absolute Editions and an upcoming Animated Film based on "President Luthor goes bat$hit crazy for no other reason besides I can't think of a better way to get him out of the Oval Office" arc. And some of those people post here -- which, as T points out, is much less one-sided than the Liefeld or Austen hate, which is pretty much *everywhere*, including here.

ULTIMATES really was supposed to be AUTHORITY with Marvel characters, and I thought Millar sold that exceptionally well.

I vaguely remember Mark Millar claiming that The Ultimates was supposed to be pretty much the opposite of The Authority. Where The Authority was all about big scale widescreen action with whole nations getting wiped out in an instant, The Ultimates was on a much smaller scale with lots more time spent on characterisation and fight scenes only actually happening once in a half-dozen issues.

I don't think the truth is that extreme, but there is something to it.

I have unsubscribed from this thread; I should have done so 50 posts ago.

Uh....thanks for the update, I guess?

@DanCJ: I'd never heard that he meant ULT as an anti-Authority. That's very interesting, but I'd suggest that by about the second trade he was back in the widescreen business. The first few issues, though, I have to admit, about as intimate as his superhero work's ever been.

"intimate" - That's the word I was looking for. I've tried to find the interview on google, but there are just too many hits.

Signs that the Internet really has nowhere to go but down: I've been lectured and insulted by someone who refuses to use his real name and signs himself with the alias of a Dr. Strange villain. 'Super Hypocrisy' doesn't begin to cover it...

Sorry, T, I was in a pissy mood. I was having a bad day. We all were by the looks of it.

Omar Karindu's not a Doctor Strange villain, I was roasting you rather than insulting you, and I'm expectantly awaiting your explanation of just what constitutes my hypocrisy in this matter.

Hypocrisy refers to a failure to live up to one's own stated moral standards. Had I spoken against insulting speech and then insulted Mr. Burke, that would be hypocrisy. Of course, I did no such thing, so I am again left to believe Mr. Burke badly misunderstands the words he uses (or, more accurately, attempts and fails to use).

In the interests of enlightening you, gentle readers, I shall now provide a proper example of hypocrisy: Mr. Graeme Burke, who had referred to posters here as, and I quote, "comic book fans [who] live up to the stereotype" and later explained that his opponents suffer from "the compulsive need to sound like idiots" has now told me what a naughty person I am for insulting him. This statement was not made in defense against me, as it appeared prior to my effort at verbal evisceration of the aforementioned victim of a cruel and capricious nature, Mr. Graeme Burke.

That would be definitive hypocrisy -- the setting forth of a moral standard one does not uphold, an the duplicitous pretense that one's conduct in the relevant matter has been unimpeachable. Fortunately, I do not profess moral disdain for insults, and can therefore now call Mr. Burke a thick-headed, functionally illiterate twerp for whom a keyboard and modem are instruments of inadvertent self-harm. Children everywhere should be brought out of school to point and laugh at the unfortunate Mr. Burke, the better that they might avoid his miserable example in life.

As I hate to speak entirely without support for my claims, I point you to an example of Mr. Burke's aforementioned functional illiteracy, to wit, his apparent delusion that Omar Karindu, a Marvel comics character, is "a Doctor Strange villain." In fact, in Karindu's only published appearances, he was an old friend of Strange's who safeguarded a dangerous mystical artifact. After Strange fell victim to the artifact, Karindu helped Strange's other allies free him from its malign influence. For those who, unlike Mr. Burke, are capable of understanding words, pictures and narratives, the story is summarized here: http://www.marvunapp.com/Appendix/karinduomar.htm

I would submit that Mr. Burke inability to comprehend one of Gerry Conway's least nuanced stories in a long line of nuance-free stories, as well as his apparent failure to use Google to find a working summary thereof, ought constitute powerful if merely suggestive disclaimers regarding his opinions and readings of comic books in general, not merely those by Jeph Loeb. Added to his impressive series of malapropisms when attempting to pejoratively characterize others, I would further submit that his opinions on any thought expressed in any medium are suspect and likely worthless.

Thank you for your time, ladies and gentlemen of the Academy for the Hopeful Engoodening of Comic-Books. We may now return Mr. Burke to captivity, the better to observe and remedy his future imbecilities.

"Internet really has nowhere to go but down"

You really don't spend a lot of time on the internet, do you Graeme? Because if this is a bad mood we've been in a bad mood for at least a decade. Don't go on IMDb, your head may explode.

Someone needs to point me to one thing in this thread that Graeme posted that was actually an argument or point about comics rather than something about Graeme Burke's "moral" judgement of everyone else posting. His entry into the thread was a one-liner about "groupthink." His follow-up involved calling everyone here a compulsive idiot. And then he started whining when other people started ripping into him.

Who's bad mood started the problem here? Who lowered the tone -- in fact, did nothing but lower the tone -- and then started complaining that the tone was *gasp* lowered. Graeme showed up, took a dump in the comments, and then hung around complaining about the smell.

Some serious advice to anyone with a contrary opinion: if you have a problem with an assessment of Jeph Loeb's work, the best thing to do is to present an argument for Jeph Loeb's work. Don't imitate Graeme, making the conversation about how "good" or "bad" everyone here is rather than about...hell, whatever you want to say about Jeph Loeb's comics work. And know the comics you reference, as anyone discussing something should know their topic colorably well. Graeme's only reference to any real comic book got it wrong on the most basic details.

If you come to a comics site to argue, it helps to be discussing comics from the get-go.

1) First of all, I may have gotten the details of the identity wrong but, at least, I can at least spell the name of my opponent in a debate

2) Moreover, I at least use my real name instead of hiding behind an alias which was actually my point.

3) I am done here. "Omar", you can have the last word all you want. And since you do what you do anomynously you will, I am sure, continue to do it with impunity because hiding behind an alias enables you to do that.

4) If you want to talk with me, "Omar", feel free to e-mail me-- you can get my address from Brian-- with your real name and we can continue to chat about this like reasonable adults.

Bye

You really don’t spend a lot of time on the internet, do you Graeme?

Actually, I do, Ted. I go to CBSG, well until today, because I thought it was a safe place to read great things about a hobby and interact with fellow fans and occasionally blow off steam.

I don't like starting a flame war, and so I feel I should apologize for that. And this is where I am getting off the ride.

1. Good for you, Mr. Burke. Utterly beside the point, of course, but good for you.

2. Your point is that you don't use a pseudonym? I think we can add "point" to the list of words whose meanings you don't actually know.

3. It's nice to see that your "last post" wasn't you last post, even with no intervening replies.

4. I think I've made it clear, repeatedly, that I don't want to talk to you. As far as I can tell, almost no one here wants to talk to you. The fact that you seem to be a prickly, irrational twit incapable of making anything resembling an argument for your putative positions may have something to do with that; your evident habit of entering a conversation by calling everyone in it a jerk or a moron, only to take umbrage when they respond in kind makes up the rest of the reasons not to take you seriously. We can't continue a chat about this like reasonable adults because you've ensured that I cannot perceive you as a reasonable adult; for that matter, you'd be hard-pressed to identify the subject matter of our "chat." I've been insulting you and tearing apart your conduct, and you've been indulging in increasingly self-contradicting bouts of pecksniffery and wounded non-sequitur.

"We are all idiots." -- Scott Adams

Is pecksniffery a word? If so, I'm adding it to my arsenal. If not, then it's a marvelous piece of invention, Omar.

I stand fully behind Graeme's right to be as pissy as he wants, and Omar's right to piss right back at him, but let's not forget who the real enemy here is: whoever the heck is editing Jeph Loeb on ULTIMATUM.

Yeah, pecksniffery's a word. It's one of those wonderful Dickensian character names that was so evocative it became a linguistic creature of its own.

Graeme, Omar; I like you guys. You're well-reasoning, erudite chaps who add much to the way of comics discussion. Try to tone down the red-faced baboonery, buffoonery, fisticuffs, and even pecksniffery, whatever the hell that is. The Comics Should Be Good Powers That Be (read: Overlord Cronin) tend to let people say what they please within these comment threads (it's more colorful that way), but I, personally, don't like to see blood in the streets. Play nice.

motherfuckers!