ForgotPassword?
Sign Up
Search this Topic:
Forum Jump
Posts: 1050
Jun 14 10 10:02 PM
Snappleshacks wrote:icemanjeff79 wrote:The X-Men books of the '90s (and I'm not talking about the spinoffs, just the core 2 X-Men titles) get a bad rap -- perhaps because of all of the (rather unnecessary) spin-offs. But the core titles had a few great runs that hold up til today. Specifically great was the period of time when Alan Davis was writing both books at once (and drawing one as well). Having recently bound the full runs of both main X titles and embarked on a read-through, I have to disagree. The Lobdell/Niceiza stuff is atrocious. I should be on the Davis period within the next week or so, but from memory the characterizations were still off. I was surprised how well most of the Claremont run held up, and equally surprised how quickly all good will is lost by his replacement hacks.
icemanjeff79 wrote:The X-Men books of the '90s (and I'm not talking about the spinoffs, just the core 2 X-Men titles) get a bad rap -- perhaps because of all of the (rather unnecessary) spin-offs. But the core titles had a few great runs that hold up til today. Specifically great was the period of time when Alan Davis was writing both books at once (and drawing one as well).
Share This