When the lunatic fringe was just that, and ignorable, sue. But when the fringe has become a large part of the main fabric, when it seems sometimes that the rational, sane fans who read strictly for pleasure have become the fringe --- then we're in trouble.

John Bodin: Watchmen -- the earlier Squadron Supreme story told the same tale and did it better -- the only reason this story was so popular, and the only reason it eclipsed the Squadron Supreme story, and the reason it has endured is the undeniable attraction of the cutely benign, iconic yellow smiley with the bloody bullet hole in its forehead.  Reason it didn't need to be told:  This marked the TRUE beginning of the "deconstruction for fun and profit" trend.  Darwyn Cooke's DC: The New Frontier was a much, MUCH stronger story than Watchmen, but nobody even seemed to notice because despite the fact that it told a DAMN good story, it lacked the inherent kewlness of a bloody smiley -- proof positive that there is no accounting for taste.

---

Sorry, John, cannot agree with you there.

WATCHMEN was a pretty seminal story for a lot of reasons. Lots of people don't like it and think it was a mistake, but it made a huge impact in the market. I think the story deserves the acclaim its received. I haven't read New Frontier but (and I say this as a guy who likes Mark Gruenwald's work) I don't think Squadron Supreme really compares to Watchmen.

And... point of information: the smiley face button doesn't have a bullet hole in the forehead, it has a smear of blood at the "five minutes to midnight" position. The "bullethole smiley" was something that came after, unrelated to Watchmen.

"the only reason this story was so popular, and the only reason it eclipsed the Squadron Supreme story, and the reason it has endured is the undeniable attraction of the cutely benign, iconic yellow smiley with the bloody bullet hole in its forehead"

Personally I only buy comics that have a cute smiley face on. The fact that it was one of the most interesting and well illustrated comics I had read in a long time had nothing whatsoever to do with it.

Pretty much any story that changes the character's status quo in a way that takes them away from their core concept (mitigating Spider-Man's sense of responsibility, reducing Batman's survivor's guilt and need to avenge his parents' deaths, making Superman only one survivor of Krypton among many [after thinking he was the Last Son], etc.) seems like an intrinsically BAD story.

Bucky's resurrection? Terrible idea.

The weddings of Clark Ken/Lois Lane and Peter Parker/Mary Jane Watson? Terrible ideas both.

They just don't work. They sound kewl but they change who these people are fundamentally... and shouldn't be written.

Any story that turns Gwen Stacy into a liar with bastard children gets my vote. 

Sins past.

I see no reaon to go and demean and quite frankly creepify the spiderman mythos like that.

****************

Could not agree more Mr. Matthewman. And I knew eventually we would agree on something.