Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login
The John Byrne Forum
Byrne Robotics > The John Byrne Forum << Prev Page of 21 Next >>
Topic: Dick Giordano regrets "Grim and Gritty" (Topic Closed Topic Closed) Post ReplyPost New Topic
Author
Message
Rick Whiting
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 22 April 2004
Posts: 2214
Posted: 14 November 2009 at 8:35pm | IP Logged | 1  

Brad, when I said TDK and Watchmen are not the same when it comes to "realism" and being "grim and gritty", I was talking about the way the unheroic,diturbing,depressing,unlikable,hopeless,and deconstruction nature the Watchmen characters and the world they live in compared to the more straight forward and exciting heroic portrayal of Batman in TDK. It seems to me that Watchmen (both the comic and the movie) was a pointless attempt to make a "realistic!" adult superhero story, while TDK seemed more like an attempt to make a dark (but fun) superhero action movie with a wider appeal.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Brad Krawchuk
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 19 June 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 5819
Posted: 14 November 2009 at 10:37pm | IP Logged | 2  

Yes, but my point is Hollywood looks at both of those and goes "Dark Realistic Superheroes"

Just like they look at Spider-Man 3 and say "good movie" because it made money. 

Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Koroush Ghazi
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 25 October 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 1681
Posted: 15 November 2009 at 6:43am | IP Logged | 3  

 Rick Whiting wrote:
You would think that after the under performance of Watchmen at the boxoffice, the big 2 would get hint that most people don't wanrsuperheroes to be extrem3ly "realistic"and "grim and gritty".

I agree, the big commercial successes like Spider-Man 1 and X-Men 2 I wouldn't categorize as grim and gritty in any sense.

 Brad Krawchuk wrote:
Rick - of course, Watchmen is countered in that regard by the DarkKnight, which is the second highest grossing film of all time and is a"grim and gritty" "realistic" take on superheroes.

I personally wouldn't classify Dark Knight as grim and gritty. Especially as Batman is still clearly a hero with boundaries, and the Joker is in no way represented the way he was in Dark Knight Returns for example. The Batman in Batman Begins/Dark Knight would not snap the Joker's neck with his bare hands the way the Batman in Dark Knight Returns did.

For better or worse, Hollywood is trying to make the superhero movies more plausible, not necessarily realistic, so they can capture a wider audience. The general themes in the movies seem to be much the same as those seen in comics from the Silver Age.
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Grumpy Old Guy

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 133317
Posted: 15 November 2009 at 6:58am | IP Logged | 4  

The other dominoes don't topple until the first one has.

++

Watchmen wasn't the first "grim and gritty" domino. It wasn't even the
first "grim and gritty" domino that Alan Moore toppled.

••

But it was the one that others flocked to imitate. And, of course, the bulk
of the blame lies with DC and Marvel for encouraging, even mandating,
that imitation.

Back to Top profile | search
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Grumpy Old Guy

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 133317
Posted: 15 November 2009 at 7:03am | IP Logged | 5  

I still think that scene is more "realistic" (read: possible) than the creation of
someone like Dr. Manhattan. I mean, the guy can travel through time and
space with no effort, he's completely indestructible, and he can control
basically all matter. YEAH, that's a real world superhero!

••

And telepathy and teleportation are commonplace out here in the real world?

You enter here into the realms of a bit of absurdity I have noted before, from
OHOTMU, when the text solemnly informed us that altho Fin Fang Foom had
been portrayed as speaking, this was most likely telepathy. Because, you
know, a two hundred foot long telepathic dragon is much more realistic than
a two hundred foot long talking dragon.

Back to Top profile | search
 
William McMahon
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 24 March 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 224
Posted: 15 November 2009 at 9:16am | IP Logged | 6  

John,
You've always had a sense of humor, but you have pulled out your A-game for some of the thoughts in this thread!!!
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Wayde Murray
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 14 October 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 3115
Posted: 15 November 2009 at 9:34am | IP Logged | 7  

Koroush wrote:
For better or worse, Hollywood is trying to make the superhero movies more plausible, not necessarily realistic, so they can capture a wider audience. The general themes in the movies seem to be much the same as those seen in comics from the Silver Age.

**

Hollywood has also been making action movies into superhero movies without costumes for a quarter century. Compare the Luke Sykwalker or Indiana Jones who swing over an abyss to the physical abilites of the same characters in their sequels. Look at what the Connery Bond could do compared to the Craig Bond. Could any normal person survive what John McClane does in the Die Hard franchise?

Ever since Schwarzenegger started getting starring roles that weren't mythic characters (like Hercules and Conan) that were nonetheless mythic in abilities, Hollywood has been upping the ante.

Superhero movies add costumes to these characters, they don't necessarily add much else.

Wolverine isn't the only tough guy who can survive almost anything to have morphed into the indestructible guy who can shrug off absolutely everything. The Hollywood action movie star is right there with him.

Back to Top profile | search
 
Arc Carlton
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 13 April 2009
Location: Peru
Posts: 3493
Posted: 15 November 2009 at 11:56am | IP Logged | 8  

Would anyone say Superman Returns was grim and gritty ?
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Brad Krawchuk
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 19 June 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 5819
Posted: 15 November 2009 at 12:00pm | IP Logged | 9  

Arc - Superman Returns was another word that rhymes with gritty. 
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Chad Carter
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 16 June 2005
Posts: 9584
Posted: 15 November 2009 at 12:24pm | IP Logged | 10  

 

SUPERMAN RETURNS wasn't gritty, it was creepy. I've seen zombie movies that creeped me out less.

Back to Top profile | search
 
Chad Carter
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 16 June 2005
Posts: 9584
Posted: 15 November 2009 at 12:44pm | IP Logged | 11  

 

There seems to be a kind of connective tissue through Spider-Man comics. Gwen Stacy dies in the 1960s, Captain Jean DeWolff dies in the 1980s. Between the two moments (both of which could be cited as grim/gritty), I didn't notice comics having drastically pandered to "realism".

I recall stuff like the Squid being assassinated in DETECTIVE COMICS, and Batman turning into a vampire. Ben Grimm got shot through the arm by Deathlok. The black Giant Man got radiation poisoning from fighting Nuklo. The Whizzer ended up on Skid Row. Ms. Marvel got raped by a creepy Beyonder type and gave birth to his physical form in our world. Wonder Girl got turned out by one of the Greek Titans. Captain America beheaded Baron Blood with his shield.

All in all, these moments I can recite after 20 years or more. Except for the Carol Danvers thing (probably the most inane superhero story ever written involving wonderful talented people), I can't say any of that stuff was bad, but it was rare.

I don't know what to think, but Giordano didn't open the door. What needs to be looked into is why comics didn't change drastically after Gwen Stacy, but changed forever after Jean DeWolff.

Back to Top profile | search
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Grumpy Old Guy

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 133317
Posted: 15 November 2009 at 1:30pm | IP Logged | 12  

What needs to be looked into is why comics didn't change drastically
after Gwen Stacy, but changed forever after Jean DeWolff.

••

I'll go back to the ol' bugaboo, fans-turned-pro. When Gwen died -- in
the Seventies, btw, not the Sixties -- the tidal swell of fans becoming the
people who wrote, drew and, ultimately, edited the books was just
beginning. There were still plenty of Old Guard folk there, in positions of
authority, to remind people what these thing were supposed to be.

Couple this to a shrinking marketplace in which a particular kind of fan -
- older, reading for a long time, obsessive about details and "continuity"
-- was becoming, by attrition, a larger and large part of the audience,
and we have a recipe for disaster. When fans who like this kind of stuff
become the people creating the stories, and targeting them for fellow
fans who like this kind of stuff, there's nowhere to go but down.

Back to Top profile | search
 

<< Prev Page of 21 Next >>
  Post ReplyPost New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login