Comments on: Is Marvel Really “Dangerous”?

By: Djkazaz

Djkazaz — Sun, 12 Jun 2011 07:37:04 +0000

Sorry my comment about should say they (marvel) were NEVER really dangerous in the cultural sense.

Doh, typing on a phone sucks.

By: Djkazaz

Djkazaz — Sun, 12 Jun 2011 07:35:27 +0000

I’ve been reading marvel comics since the 80′s and I can honestly say they were really dangerous in the cultural sense.
Their stories were dangerous to my 12 year old mind: “of my God! They killed Jean Grey/Elektra/” but that was it. Even my 17 year old mind, a few years later, could tell these guys were more about the money than anything culturally meaningful. Vertigo was dangerous (in the beginning at least), but marvel? Come on!

By: silvanthalas

silvanthalas — Wed, 25 May 2011 21:10:27 +0000

Fair enough, Coming.

And yet, I’m not sure Marvel is nearly as dangerous and edgy as Brevoort claims. Yeah, it’s been 30 years of a more violent Daredevil and Wolverine. Ok, now what? Is Marvel really that edgy or dangerous about ANYTHING any more?

His first sentence still makes no bloody sense: “… one of the fundamental appeals of comics… is the fact that they’re dangerous”

To whom? Religious zealots? Politicians? Sorry, but none of that does a thing to mean when I go to pick up a comic.

I’ve read comics for as long as I can remember, including all those early, ‘dangerous’ Wolverine issues. At no point did I think, “Yeah, I’m going to read a comic book because it’s DANGEROUS”. FFS.

By: justsaying

justsaying — Tue, 24 May 2011 12:33:29 +0000

Yea this was a chop job by Graeme to make an article…nothing more than that. Manufactured controversy for the entry hits. Of course he will just reply he was simply wondering and asking a question and neglected to provide the adequate framing of the original quote. Don’t expect too much from him.

By: Coming Curse

Coming Curse — Tue, 24 May 2011 05:46:07 +0000

@silvanthalas

If you actually read the interview you’ll see that Breevort is specifically responding to a concern that a fan raised about books becoming more violent SINCE THE 1980′s. That’s why he’s using books from the 80′s as a point of reference. He’s pointing out that some of the elements that THE FAN was concerened about have been around to some degree at least since the 80′s.

Of course I can see how you would misinterpret Breevort’s intentions since the quote was deliberately taken out of context by Graeme. In the paragraph quoted above Breevort is directly responing to A FAN who was complaining that he was avoiding certain Marvel titles because they were TOO explicit or provocative. This fan wants Marvel to print books that would be uncontroversial material even for the youngest of children. Of course by THAT standard Marvel comics ARE dangerous and edgy and the comments make much more sense. Graeme McMillan does this frequently in his blog posts.

By: Comics Cavern

Comics Cavern — Tue, 24 May 2011 03:38:50 +0000

Foil covers can be dangerous. Those papercuts are nothing to joke about!

By: K-Box

K-Box — Tue, 24 May 2011 01:03:57 +0000

silvanthalas: This is very true, because now that you mention it, Tom Brevoort citing decades-old stories as evidence of Marvel’s supposed rebelliousness reminds me of Hillary Clinton in 2008, trying to argue that she was still a relevant agent of change in spite of having been involved in government longer than many members of her target demographic of voters had even been ALIVE.

By: K-Box

K-Box — Tue, 24 May 2011 00:44:49 +0000

Coming Curse: Marvel is “dangerous” in the same way that Andrew “Dice” Clay was “dangerous.” In terms of promoting dumb and unhealthy ideas that contribute to an overall cultural rot, they are indeed “dangerous.” In terms of the ways in which they TRY to be “dangerous” – “daring,” revolutionary,” “cutting-edge,” “inventive,” etc. – modern Marvel is no more “dangerous” than a talentless hack standup deluding an entire generation of young American males into believing that misogynistic rephrasings of well-worn nursery rhymes equates to thought-provoking comedy that somehow demonstrates that you’re defying societal institutions, instead of merely reinforcing their worst prejudices.

And as for this?

“I honestly don’t want to get sucked into another endless circular argument with you [...]”

Like everything else you have ever said here, this is a complete and total lie, because if you didn’t want me to shut you down the same way that I did the last time, you wouldn’t have bothered to reply.

People like you are the reason that Dane Cook still has a career.

By: JesseBaker

JesseBaker — Tue, 24 May 2011 00:23:02 +0000

Coming Curse, “dangerous” for Marvel would be SOMEONE at Marvel admitting what fans have LONG been saying: that One More Day/Brand New Day/Brand New Day II: Big Time Electric Boogaloo” has been an unmitigated failure and publicly DEMAND that Quesada/Wacker/Brevoort reverse course and apologize for being complete and total shits to fans who’ve been protesting this disaster of a revamp and QWB’s complete and total disdain from their paying customers, for the simple crime of NOT LIKING One More Day/Brand New Day/Brand New Day II: Big Time Electric Boogaloo.

Someone in the company standing up to Quesdada and telling him what a little shit he has been acting like, as well as his so-called “editors” (they can’t even be called “editors” given how Brevoot rubber stamps Bendis’s scripts sight unseen and Wacker spends his time at work telling potential customers to fuck off, stuff that would get an editor for a non-comic publication FIRED and BLACKLISTED from ever working again). Someone needs to say “Yes, we have fucked up big time and pissed off so many readers that sales are now at an all-time low for our flagship character and need to undo Quesada’s pet project in order to undo the damage and bring back the fans we are losing” within the company for the world to see. Someone needs to call for Wacker to be FIRED and BLACKLISTED from the company for being a little shit who gets into flame wars, further driving away readers.

Accountability. That’s a dangerous word at Marvel, because NO ONE wants to take responsibility for why Marvel is going down the toilet saleswise and why their flagship is a laughing stock and one of the most loathed and hated comics currently being published today.

By: Coming Curse

Coming Curse — Mon, 23 May 2011 23:23:02 +0000

K-Box, I honestly don’t want to get sucked into another endless circular argument with you, but you simply CAN’T be complaining about Marvel not being dangerous enough. You can’t. You just accused them of promoting extremist racial segregationism a week ago! I can’t imagine what a comic company could do that’s MORE dangerous than promoting racial segration! You of all people should think Marvel is TOO dangerous and controverisal!

By: Aaron Poehler

Aaron Poehler — Mon, 23 May 2011 22:37:50 +0000

Comics CAN be dangerous, but Marvel comics in particular have never, ever been remotely close to dangerous.

By: silvanthalas

silvanthalas — Mon, 23 May 2011 21:19:24 +0000

It’s funny you mention Duran Duran, K-Box, considering that the above examples of ‘edgy’ or whatever were Miller’s Wolverine and Daredevil… all of which were the early 80′s.

Nothing like bringing up stuff from 30 years ago to show how behind the times you are.

By: K-Box

K-Box — Mon, 23 May 2011 20:34:09 +0000

Being “dangerous” and “edgy” is like being “cool” and “sexy” — if you have to TELL someone that you are, then you’re NOT. I can sing along to Duran Duran songs all day, every day, but it will not mean that I am, in fact, Hungry Like The Wolf.