Eighties and Nineties Message Board >> View Thread

Author
America's Captain 

Maintainer

Location: Bayville New Jersey
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 12,139


I actually dropped Thor when he took over. I don't like his art nor his stories. What's the appeal?

I know people liked seeing ancient mythic elements like the goat-chariot. I didn't. Goats are silly. I think people liked his costume designs, which I did too. I think his stories were more magical and less scientific, right? Was this a draw?






Posted with Google Chrome 61.0.3163.100 on Windows 10
Reverend Meteor


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 11,689




    Quote:
    I actually dropped Thor when he took over. I don't like his art nor his stories. What's the appeal?


Wow. I think Thor's only had one good run...and that was it.

Not liking his run is like preferring the Supremes after Diana Ross left or liking Lynyrd Skynyrd better after the plane crash.


    Quote:
    I know people liked seeing ancient mythic elements like the goat-chariot. I didn't. Goats are silly. I think people liked his costume designs, which I did too. I think his stories were more magical and less scientific, right? Was this a draw?


I liked seeing ancient mythic elements...like the goat chariot. Goats are f*cking awesome. Mythical goats more so.

I'm not a big fan of Simonson art...like I didn't like it on Fantastic Four. But for Thor it really worked IMO.

Walt seemed like the one Thor writer who was knowledgeable on norse mythology which made his run a delight. Other Thor writers seemed more interested in the Marvel aspect of Thor and not the mythological aspect.

Walt's the one good Thor run.





Posted with Mozilla Firefox 56.0 on Windows 10
Menshevik


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 4,335



    Quote:
    I actually dropped Thor when he took over. I don't like his art nor his stories. What's the appeal?



    Quote:
    I know people liked seeing ancient mythic elements like the goat-chariot. I didn't. Goats are silly. I think people liked his costume designs, which I did too. I think his stories were more magical and less scientific, right? Was this a draw?


Well, there's no arguing about taste, even if it is as weird as yours! ;\-\)

I took a while to get used to his style, but I then loved his run on Thor. That he introduced some things from mythology - like Odin's father and grandfather for instance - was nice, but what mattered was that he pulled it off with flair, making e.g. a chariot pulled by two goats look cool.

But he also did not neglect the already established parts of the Marvel Asgardian mythos. He made me care about Balder (an Asgardian from the myths) and about Skurge (Lee/Kirby creation). He also caused quite a few belly-laughs in me, but in a feel-good kind of way, e.g. in his treatment of Volstagg (whom he gave his big happy family) and in the at first glance bizarre Frog of Thunder arc.

I also loved Walt Simonson's work on other projects, for instance on the X-Men/New Teen Titans crossover, and since I'm a fan of Rogue Uncanny X-Men #171 will always hold a special place in my heart. But his best work may actually have been his collaboration with his wife Louise on X-Factor. That series had been such an utter trainwreck since its inception, but those two managed to largely salvage it and make it a must-read that thanks to Walt's artwork was visually exciting.

Oh yes: And he also has one of the coolest signatures of superhero artist (that dinosaur look).




Posted with Mozilla Firefox 56.0 on Windows 7
America's Captain 

Maintainer

Location: Bayville New Jersey
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 12,139



    Quote:
    Wow. I think Thor's only had one good run...and that was it.


So Stan and Jack's wasn't good? Or Stan and John Buscema's? Nothing in all those Masterworks is good? I wonder if most Simonson fans feel that way. Maybe they do.


    Quote:
    Not liking his run is like preferring the Supremes after Diana Ross left or liking Lynyrd Skynyrd better after the plane crash.



    Quote:
    I liked seeing ancient mythic elements...like the goat chariot. Goats are f*cking awesome. Mythical goats more so.


Oh man. I wonder if we'll see the goat chariot in any of the movies.


    Quote:
    I'm not a big fan of Simonson art...like I didn't like it on Fantastic Four. But for Thor it really worked IMO.


It looks like an acid trip to me. I guess maybe it's supposed to. It reminds me a little of Craig Russel's art, which I also dislike. I wonder if Craig Russell would have been popular on Thor.


    Quote:
    Walt seemed like the one Thor writer who was knowledgeable on norse mythology which made his run a delight. Other Thor writers seemed more interested in the Marvel aspect of Thor and not the mythological aspect.


Yeah, I was more interested in the Marvel aspect too. And I've read the Norse myths. I would have liked to see the Norse myths illustrated by John Buscema or Barry Windsor-Smith or Joe Kubert.


    Quote:
    Walt's the one good Thor run.


God, I loved so much of Thor. Hundreds of issues of awesome stories.






Posted with Google Chrome 61.0.3163.100 on Windows 10
Reverend Meteor


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 11,689






    Quote:
    God, I loved so much of Thor. Hundreds of issues of awesome stories.


I loved Walt's run. Not much else (ok Defalco's run but I'm ashamed to admit that). Walt's run took the myths into account more than most other writers IMO. I don't really like marvel Thor...I like mythological Thor.

(eventually I need to sit down and read Walt's Ragnarok run for IDW...his non Marvel Thor)





Posted with Mozilla Firefox 56.0 on Windows 7
Iron Man Unit 007


Member Since: Thu Oct 20, 2011
Posts: 4,334


Walt brought in many of the mythological elements and helped usher in a good Ragnarok story.

But what I also liked was that he shook up and rebuilt THOR's status quo by bringing in someone ELSE that could life the hammer, Beta Ray Bill.

Their initial fight did have THOR at a minor disadvantage with the 60 second time limit or revert to Don Blake weakness still in him.

When ODIN had them duel for the hammer, it was more or less a fair fight, but ODIN did send them to Skartheim (spell check please), a volcanic realm that can kill even the gods. Bill came from a volcanic environment and was more conditioned to the heat. This gave him a subtle edge in the fight and even though they did beat each other senseless, Bill revived first and he did try to save THOR and himself.

Thus Bill won and THOR finally learned the lesson of humility that ODIN had wanted him to learn for so long.

Then to solve the hammer problem, ODIN has Stormbreaker forged and enchanted to be the same as Mjolnir. ODIN did decree that the hammer was now THOR's forever, but he didn't take into account that others could still be worthy, such as Steve Rogers. \:\)

After they saved Bill's people from Surtur's demons, ODIN then transfers the Don Blake enchantments to Bill's hammer, though I think the 60 second time limit was removed and Bill could then revert to his original self and THOR was rid of Don Blake.

At least until all the STUPID retcons that would occur in the future to bring Blake back........ugh.


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 56.0 on Windows 7
Ancient One

Moderator

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 6,258



    Quote:
    I actually dropped Thor when he took over. I don't like his art nor his stories. What's the appeal?


Beats me.

I quite liked his Thor stuff, but that may just have been because the book had been in a bit of a slump. There was a run of very so-so stories after #300, and it felt like Simonson was actually doing something interesting with Thor again. I might have felt differently if he'd taken over right after Buscema's run.

I'm more of a fan of his 70's work. His 'Manhunter' was knockout.

Most of his work though, doesn't appeal to me. Hated his thankfully brief run on Avengers. The rest of it doesn't grab me at all. His storytelling is fine, but his art is a little too scratchy and stylised for my liking.




Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 7
Superman's Pal

Moderator

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 3,629


I suppose I was a latecomer to Simonson. I think the first thing of his I remember seeing was RoboCop Vs. The Terminator. His angular art style worked well for a story about robots.

Later I did discover his Manhunter which I liked.

Then in the 2000s it was Orion, probably his attempt to equal his Thor run with a DC character. He tried to bring more mythology into the story even if it was just New Gods mythology. It was probably the dozenth retread of "the final battle between Orion and Darkseid" this time with Orion winning and turning to the dark side in his father's place. It was a pretty decent run.

I've never actually read his Thor.



Posted with Google Chrome 61.0.3163.100 on Windows 7
Nose Norton


Location: Plainville
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 5,991


I'm with you, AC. I don't dislike Simonson's Thor, like I do his Fantastic Four, but it's not my favorite. I bought Thor sporadically in the 80's and picked up most of the run later on. I guess it starts with his artwork. I enjoy DeFalco/Frenz's run more because it's a blatant throwback and because I like Frenz's art style much better. I think it took Lee/Kirby awhile to get going on the title but once they did they produced great stuff. Len Wein and Roy Thomas did good work, too, but you could say that about almost every Marvel title in the 70's.
As for Simonson, he wrote some good long term stories, but I never found Beta Ray Bill that appealing and Simonson's humor often left me flat. I feel his Thor run is good but overrated.


Posted with Google Chrome 62.0.3202.89 on Windows 10
thuggernaut


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 1,288




Posted with Mozilla Firefox 56.0 on Windows 7

Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2018 Powermad Software