Trebuchet Posted June 23, 2003 Report Share Posted June 23, 2003 The History Channel is running a program Monday night, June 23, at 9pm/8 central on superheroes. Looks interesting, and right up our alley. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spectrum Posted June 23, 2003 Report Share Posted June 23, 2003 My comic book store had hand-outs for it. And I can say for certain that I will definitely tune in for this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhantomGM2602 Posted June 23, 2003 Report Share Posted June 23, 2003 Ditto for yours truly if I can get there in time and off the computer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killer Shrike Posted June 23, 2003 Report Share Posted June 23, 2003 ? Uh....what would it be about, exactly? Heroes in a Historical perspective? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killer Shrike Posted June 23, 2003 Report Share Posted June 23, 2003 Also, what time would that be Pacific? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperPheemy Posted June 23, 2003 Report Share Posted June 23, 2003 West Coast feed will air it at 9pm. If you've got a satellite and can pull down the East Coast feed, you can see it at 6pm. Of course, I'm still trying to get the Cubicle of Solitude wired for cable. You wouldn't belive the hassles. How am I supposed to save the world when I have to wait for the cable guy to show up sometime between 1 and 7 pm? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCoy Posted June 24, 2003 Report Share Posted June 24, 2003 I love the 21st century. DirecTV will bring the program from a sattelite in Clark orbit to my desktop in just under an hour. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redmenace Posted June 24, 2003 Report Share Posted June 24, 2003 Originally posted by Killer Shrike Also, what time would that be Pacific? I believe it is at 9:00 pm pacific and these things usually repeat on the weekend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hermit Posted June 24, 2003 Report Share Posted June 24, 2003 While I shouldn't mention this as it lowers my chances of winning... there is a sweepstakes for a seven inch bust of Captain America on the History channel's website. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killer Shrike Posted June 24, 2003 Report Share Posted June 24, 2003 Originally posted by Hermit While I shouldn't mention this as it lowers my chances of winning... there is a sweepstakes for a seven inch bust of Captain America on the History channel's website. The Laws of Karma would seem to indicate that you should win that..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hermit Posted June 24, 2003 Report Share Posted June 24, 2003 That was some good stuff. Except now I feel GUILTY for not having a current subscription. Darn it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCoy Posted June 24, 2003 Report Share Posted June 24, 2003 Was a pretty good historical overview of the genre. Am somewhat suprised they went into such detail about the death of Electra and didn't even mention Phoenix. May have been a result of which creators they could interview. (Didn't see Clairmont, Byrne, or Shooter.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent X Posted June 24, 2003 Report Share Posted June 24, 2003 How can you have a comics history documentary and not talk about Shooter!? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spectrum Posted June 24, 2003 Report Share Posted June 24, 2003 All in all, it was pretty decent. Although there were some things they could have brought up. I agree Phoenix being one (but they did mention Claremont), but I always thought that the death of Gwen Stacy was a more milestone death than Elektra in the Marvel universe (I my be slightly biased being a huge Spider-Man fan) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest white peregrine Posted June 24, 2003 Report Share Posted June 24, 2003 agreed. the death of gwen stacey was a larger milestone imo as well. I would say that her death was the turning point and the beginning of the iron age... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent X Posted June 24, 2003 Report Share Posted June 24, 2003 Let's talk Jim Shooter! The guy was in command of Marvel when all the pieces fell into place for the big comics boom. You gotta remember, Phoenix died because he demanded it. He strong-armed dozens of creators at Marvel during what many consider an excellent period for the company. He was the focus (of hatred) of a lot of the fanboy demand for writers and especially artists to get more creative control. I know he's not popular with quite a few people in the industry but I know there was a stamp of quality on most things (not Dazzler) that he touched that isn't matched very often. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jhamin Posted June 24, 2003 Report Share Posted June 24, 2003 Ok, does anybody see Wonderwoman in a new light after hearing about her golden age escapades and the real life family arragements of her creator? I mean there has always been some teasing, but really.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandi Posted June 24, 2003 Report Share Posted June 24, 2003 Good show, though it would've been funny to see one of the young snots like McFarlane or Rob Liefeld in there. (Wanna bet they asked for too much money?) The section on the Comics Code was pretty good but it seems like in trying to keep to the superhero theme they really didn't put across the impact EC comics had and how a lot of the Code seemed designed to specifically gut their comics. (And that picture of Dr. Werther was a cliche come to life. He looked like he was weaned on a lemon!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent X Posted June 24, 2003 Report Share Posted June 24, 2003 Originally posted by Jhamin Ok, does anybody see Wonderwoman in a new light after hearing about her golden age escapades and the real life family arragements of her creator? I mean there has always been some teasing, but really.... I missed a lot of it. Please describe his real life family arrangements. I remember a lot of bondage looking stuff in golden age titles, the rope, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent X Posted June 24, 2003 Report Share Posted June 24, 2003 Originally posted by Brandi Good show, though it would've been funny to see one of the young snots like McFarlane or Rob Liefeld in there. (Wanna bet they asked for too much money?) The section on the Comics Code was pretty good but it seems like in trying to keep to the superhero theme they really didn't put across the impact EC comics had and how a lot of the Code seemed designed to specifically gut their comics. (And that picture of Dr. Werther was a cliche come to life. He looked like he was weaned on a lemon!) Met Rob Liefeld. Can do without ever seeing the guy again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enforcer84 Posted June 24, 2003 Report Share Posted June 24, 2003 Originally posted by Agent X I missed a lot of it. Please describe his real life family arrangements. I remember a lot of bondage looking stuff in golden age titles, the rope, etc. I second, I missed it. What about WW? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent X Posted June 24, 2003 Report Share Posted June 24, 2003 And what about Jim Shooter? Come on guys. This is controversial stuff. Everyone and their dog thought he was the Great Satan of comics but I hold that he was one of the greatest forces for producing numerous quality comics that has been. You got Stan Lee in the 60s and Jim Shooter in the 70s/early 80s. I also hold that great (and not-so-great) artists getting so much attention that all of them thinking that they should write, even when quite a few of them obviously couldn't, was one of the most horrible things that ever happened and that creator-owned comics was a half-witted idea considering the difficulty in providing a "universe" with which to bounce characters off one another. Come on! Go after me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jhamin Posted June 24, 2003 Report Share Posted June 24, 2003 Ok the golden age wonder woman had the lasso that makes men tell the truth just like the modern version. Apparently she also had this deal where if you could chain her magical braclets together and then tie her down she would lose her mighty will and become docile and submissive. This then left her vulnerable to spankings. Almost every issue Wonder Woman was apparently bound and often gagged by her rouges gallery. One of the comics they showed on the program had her bound and thrown over the lap of a little midget guy spanking her with a brush. Wonder Woman is looking toward the viewer and winking in her best Petty Page impression. One of their comic book guru guys said that as far as he could tell nobody in the general public of the 30s "got it" and they were able to go on like this for years. It gets better. According to the history channel special she was created by the psychologist who invented the lie detector. In his private life he apparently lived happily in a big house with this wife and two kids, and another woman (a former student) and their two kids. Apparently this second woman was never seen without a pair of metal braclets on each wrist..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent X Posted June 24, 2003 Report Share Posted June 24, 2003 Originally posted by Jhamin Ok the golden age wonder woman had the lasso that makes men tell the truth just like the modern version. Apparently she also had this deal where if you could chain her magical braclets together and then tie her down she would lose her mighty will and become docile and submissive. This then left her vulnerable to spankings. Almost every issue Wonder Woman was apparently bound and often gagged by her rouges gallery. One of the comics they showed on the program had her bound and thrown over the lap of a little midget guy spanking her with a brush. Wonder Woman is looking toward the viewer and winking in her best Petty Page impression. One of their comic book guru guys said that as far as he could tell nobody in the general public of the 30s "got it" and they were able to go on like this for years. It gets better. According to the history channel special she was created by the psychologist who invented the lie detector. In his private life he apparently lived happily in a big house with this wife and two kids, and another woman (a former student) and their two kids. Apparently this second woman was never seen without a pair of metal braclets on each wrist..... That's what I suspected (not the exact details but where his interests were). Doesn't his family have some agreement with DC for them to use the character? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Destroyer Posted June 24, 2003 Report Share Posted June 24, 2003 Hello, Just caught the show earlier tonight. My overall impression: adequately done. Skewed a bit towards DC and its icons, though not unjustifiably so given their wide recognition among even non-fans. Some of the analysis seemed on the weak side. My gut reaction: Denny O'Neil lives, breathes, and gives interviews while Mark Gruenwald lies cold in his grave. There is truly no justice in the world. Posted by white peregrine: the death of gwen stacey was a larger milestone imo as well. I would say that her death was the turning point and the beginning of the iron age... Hmm, the Champions genre book regards her death as the end of the Silver Age and the beginning of the Bronze, but does point out that there's plenty of room for different interpretations of the comic "ages". In any case, it's clearly an important event. Posted by AgentX: And what about Jim Shooter? Come on guys. This is controversial stuff. Everyone and their dog thought he was the Great Satan of comics but I hold that he was one of the greatest forces for producing numerous quality comics that has been. What about him? I always did get kind of a kick out of stories of psycho fans coming up to him at conventions and going off. "You killed Phoenix! Murderer!" The X-titles were at their peak when he was at the helm, and he deserves a lot of credit for that alone. From the heavier stuff like the Phoenix Saga and Days of Future Past, to lighter fare like Kitty's Fairy Tale, the quality was generally amazing. It didn't really start to slip until about the time the Marauders showed up, and some titles, like Excalibur, stayed excellent long after even that. I remember seeing a rumor to the effect that many of the character changes that went on at Marvel later in Shooter's tenure (Spidey's black costume, Rhodey instead of Stark as Iron Man, USAgent takes over for Captain America, etc.) were the result of a threatened lawsuit by one of Stan Lee's early partners (I think it was Kirby), for royalties on characters he co-created. Some of these changes were handled well, others less so, and Shooter seems to have done about as well as could be expected in overseeing the Marvel lineup during his tenure. In any case, most of the characters went more or less "back to normal" once the threat of the lawsuit evaporated. The worst thing to happen during Shooter's reign was probably the Secret Wars. It was rushed out with ridiculous haste to beat Crisis on Infinite Earths to the shelves, plotting used a blatant all-powerful deus ex machina (the Beyonder) who would have seemed trite even in the Silver Age, and it started the trend of yearly universe-wide crossover stories that required you to pick up issues of titles you didn't collect if you wanted to get the complete picture of what was going on. Not to say the series didn't have its moments, but overall, it was just weak. One policy I thoroughly hate I first saw in action during his tenure, though I doubt it either originated or ended with him. It is the policy of taking a writer who has brought a title to new heights of brilliance, assigning him to a weak-selling title in hopes of boosting its sales, handing his previous excellent title off to talentless hacks while hoping its sales will stay high on sheer reputation, and letting said hacks utterly ruin the title. Post-Byrne Alpha Flight and post-Simonson Thor are the books that most stick in my craw here, though the post-Claremont X-titles have had their nadirs as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.