Erik Larsen is somebody who couldn't appreciate the old DC
I looked at several tweets Larsen wrote about what he thinks is a difference between Marvel and DC:
While a case could be made that some of the movies based on DC products are affected by desperation and incompetence, I fully disagree that DC's staff - during and post-Silver Age - were trying desperately to be taken seriously, and Denny O'Neil's shift for Batman back to the original Golden Age approach was very auspicuous and well regarded. Of course Lee was trying in his time to publish fun adventures, but that doesn't mean Julius Schwartz was any less so. Nor is it clear to me what Larsen had a problem with in DC's output. Was it their downplay of goofier slapstick by the end of the Silver Age? Lee usually refrained from that kind of approach, and DC must've figured it was getting a bit dated, so they downplayed the bizarre situations where heroes would be turned into animals or have their heads turn big. But they never threw out comedy wholesale, and Larsen sounds like the kind of person who just cannot appreciate DC no matter what they do. If I were a publisher at DC, I sure wouldn't be desperate to appeal to people like him, since no matter what I'd do, it's clear Larsen is the kind of person who's long made up his mind that he has no interest or gratitude for DC.
As for the movie adaptations, if he thinks Warner Brothers can blow one, even the studios who've been working on Marvel movies have failed royally too. Both the Daredevil and Elektra movies were flops, and the 2 Fantastic Four movies were a big nothing that watered Dr. Doom down to a mere crooked businessman instead of a self-appointed monarch in a fictional Balkan country. Even the recent Ghost Rider sequel didn't cut it. Why would just the makers of DC movies be incompetent? It all depends on how committed the higher echelons are to writing the best screenplay possible, and hiring dedicated scriptwriters who want to achieve that goal. Larsen also said:
The first 2 IM movies were brilliant, but with the third movie, they turned out an artistic dud. The kowtowing to China sure didn't help.
And what's this he says about Wonder Woman:
I guess he didn't appreciate George Perez's efforts when he wrote and drew WW for about 5 years, at which time he did make the Cheetah a lot more effective a villainess. And I guess he never liked the supporting cast introduced at that time like the Kapatelis mother/daughter duo (or even reintroduced cast members like Etta Candy, who became a USAF officer much like Steve Trevor). Now, here's the part where he turns almost laughable:
He doesn't have a high opinion of DC, yet he read their recent output anyway? Even after they published Identity Crisis? That's when they really fell apart and became what I'd assume he had a problem with, yet he kept on with it? Sigh. At this point, I really don't know what to make of him. A man who can't seem to decide whether he wants goofy slapstick or totally serious, humorless drama.
Growing up, it seemed Marvel comics were having fun and DC comics were trying too hard to be taken seriously. Now their movies are like that
— Erik Larsen (@ErikJLarsen) November 17, 2013
Yeah, @RobCabrera @DCComics was essentially trying to overcompensate for Adam West's Batman. Their books screamed "take us seriously!"
— Erik Larsen (@ErikJLarsen) November 17, 2013
While a case could be made that some of the movies based on DC products are affected by desperation and incompetence, I fully disagree that DC's staff - during and post-Silver Age - were trying desperately to be taken seriously, and Denny O'Neil's shift for Batman back to the original Golden Age approach was very auspicuous and well regarded. Of course Lee was trying in his time to publish fun adventures, but that doesn't mean Julius Schwartz was any less so. Nor is it clear to me what Larsen had a problem with in DC's output. Was it their downplay of goofier slapstick by the end of the Silver Age? Lee usually refrained from that kind of approach, and DC must've figured it was getting a bit dated, so they downplayed the bizarre situations where heroes would be turned into animals or have their heads turn big. But they never threw out comedy wholesale, and Larsen sounds like the kind of person who just cannot appreciate DC no matter what they do. If I were a publisher at DC, I sure wouldn't be desperate to appeal to people like him, since no matter what I'd do, it's clear Larsen is the kind of person who's long made up his mind that he has no interest or gratitude for DC.
As for the movie adaptations, if he thinks Warner Brothers can blow one, even the studios who've been working on Marvel movies have failed royally too. Both the Daredevil and Elektra movies were flops, and the 2 Fantastic Four movies were a big nothing that watered Dr. Doom down to a mere crooked businessman instead of a self-appointed monarch in a fictional Balkan country. Even the recent Ghost Rider sequel didn't cut it. Why would just the makers of DC movies be incompetent? It all depends on how committed the higher echelons are to writing the best screenplay possible, and hiring dedicated scriptwriters who want to achieve that goal. Larsen also said:
@HeroicMarc those don't even count for me. The real Marvel movies kicked in with Iron Man.
— Erik Larsen (@ErikJLarsen) November 17, 2013
The first 2 IM movies were brilliant, but with the third movie, they turned out an artistic dud. The kowtowing to China sure didn't help.
And what's this he says about Wonder Woman:
@davedrawsgood @katherinesmith WW suffers from a weak rogues gallery, supporting cast and love interest (from what I've read)...
— Erik Larsen (@ErikJLarsen) November 17, 2013
I guess he didn't appreciate George Perez's efforts when he wrote and drew WW for about 5 years, at which time he did make the Cheetah a lot more effective a villainess. And I guess he never liked the supporting cast introduced at that time like the Kapatelis mother/daughter duo (or even reintroduced cast members like Etta Candy, who became a USAF officer much like Steve Trevor). Now, here's the part where he turns almost laughable:
@_ChrisNichols I'll have to take your word for it. I stopped reading all DC books with the new 52.
— Erik Larsen (@ErikJLarsen) November 17, 2013
He doesn't have a high opinion of DC, yet he read their recent output anyway? Even after they published Identity Crisis? That's when they really fell apart and became what I'd assume he had a problem with, yet he kept on with it? Sigh. At this point, I really don't know what to make of him. A man who can't seem to decide whether he wants goofy slapstick or totally serious, humorless drama.
Labels: Batman, Daredevil, dc comics, dreadful artists, Iron Man, marvel comics, moonbat artists, Superman, Wonder Woman
About Perez:
http://ragnell.blogspot.com/2007/10/i-havent-bashed-perez-reboot-in-while.html
Posted by
Drag |
10:03 PM