Invincible

Is this the definitive superhero comic? People say it's subversive or deconstructionist but it has all the capeshit tropes, just told in a singular serialized story with a clear beginning, middle, and end.

Mike Stoklasa's Worst Fan Shirt $21.68

POSIWID: The Purpose Of A System Is What It Does Shirt $21.68

Mike Stoklasa's Worst Fan Shirt $21.68

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Read worm by wildbow

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      If that's the case then you want COIE for being the germ of all the multiverse destruction plots etc we get today

      [...]

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    People scream deconstruction but only at the first half. Once the reveals and Omni man’s true intentions are shown it ultimately becomes basic capeshit with a bit of edge. That also knows when to end because there are plots/moments that are just aping basic capeshit too.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I still haven't finished the comic but as far as I read I think the comic could be considered subersive only because we've been consuming so many cynical takes on capeshit that when we see a comic that just plays it straight foward we are surprised.
      I still can't decide if I like the show or the comic more. But I really like the comics art and it's pretty funny sometimes

      >is this definitive
      no

      >deconstructionist
      no the frick it isn't

      mark grayson is neutral evil and the story ends up being monarchist propaganda. the most benevolent characters are allen and dinosaurus

      >every comic book from the 2000s was like this
      >but only invincible is a deconstruction
      Does anyone here read comics?

      >the definitive superhero comic
      no
      >subversive or deconstructionist
      not that either
      >but it has all the capeshit tropes, just told in a singular serialized story with a clear beginning, middle, and end.
      it does and it is good for that

      Not everything needs to be a subversive innovative masterpiece. Some stuff can just be simple and good, and those are the biggest triumphs of many of Kirkman's works.

      Invincible is definitely not a deconstruction, just because it has a proper ending. More like a celebration of the genre.

      It's more akin to James Robinson's Starman, Moore's Supreme or Buisek's Astro City, a straight superhero book that enjoys more freedom than the usual BIG2-fair.

      When people sat Invincible is a deconstruction or subversive, what they're actually referring to is all the shock value plot twists that pervade the comic
      >Oh shit! Omni Man is the villain!
      >Oh shit! X character suddenly just died without any buildup!
      >Oh shit! Atom Eve aborted Mark's baby!
      >Oh shit! Conquest fights Invincible immediately after another big plot event!
      >Oh shit! Allen is now the bad guy and Mark has to ally with Thragg!
      >Oh shit! Mark got raped!
      >Oh shit! Monster Girl had lesbian sex but impregnated her alien gf so she is also technically the father of their alien son!
      >Oh shit! Robot is a villain now!
      >Oh shit! the Black Invincible dude is actually a pretty fricked up character!
      >Oh shit! Mark suddenly has a time travel AU adventure out of nowhere!

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        subversive is not the same as subverted expectations. if "people" are saying that, they're dumb

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >subversive is not the same as subverted expectations. if "people" are saying that, they're dumb
          Exactly.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        subversive is not the same as subverted expectations. if "people" are saying that, they're dumb

        Its the same moronation people have with Madoka

        >The twist is they die and that rarely happens in other versions in its genre(when it does happen) and thats a deconstruction bro!

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        And that was written when radioactive spider-man semen almost killed Mary Jane or the canonical Gwen and Goblin sex. And does anyone remember that?

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Its honestly not. I interpreted it as a straight forward, well written superhero story that doesn't apologize for what it is. It may be deeper than most superhero comics but that doesn't make it deconstructionist. Its similar to Kirkmans work on The Walking Dead. Not a deconstruction of the zombie genre, just more complex than most zombie media bothers to be

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I'd say it's definitive yeah. It's more akin to a manga in the sense that it has one writer, follows one character's journey to the end, and actually ends. Can't think of any other examples.

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous
    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      This. It both ends and never ends, goes through the major tropes and archetypes.

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Definitive? No.
    Good? Yes. Damn good.

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I still haven't finished the comic but as far as I read I think the comic could be considered subersive only because we've been consuming so many cynical takes on capeshit that when we see a comic that just plays it straight foward we are surprised.
    I still can't decide if I like the show or the comic more. But I really like the comics art and it's pretty funny sometimes

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >is this definitive
    no

    >deconstructionist
    no the frick it isn't

    mark grayson is neutral evil and the story ends up being monarchist propaganda. the most benevolent characters are allen and dinosaurus

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >every comic book from the 2000s was like this
    >but only invincible is a deconstruction
    Does anyone here read comics?

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >the definitive superhero comic
    no
    >subversive or deconstructionist
    not that either
    >but it has all the capeshit tropes, just told in a singular serialized story with a clear beginning, middle, and end.
    it does and it is good for that

    Not everything needs to be a subversive innovative masterpiece. Some stuff can just be simple and good, and those are the biggest triumphs of many of Kirkman's works.

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Invincible is definitely not a deconstruction, just because it has a proper ending. More like a celebration of the genre.

    It's more akin to James Robinson's Starman, Moore's Supreme or Buisek's Astro City, a straight superhero book that enjoys more freedom than the usual BIG2-fair.

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Capeshit standards are not very high.

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    yeah sure whatever zoomer, American comics industry is still dying.

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    for me it’s Astro City

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I thought this was okay until The Dark Age arc. Never again.

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The sheer amount of cuckshit throughout and the absolute butchering of Robots character by the end really soured me on this book.
    The ending was also really rushed and unsatisfying, there's like 10 different plot threads left completely open.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Invincible would probably be my favourite comic if the artist remained the same throughout its entire run.

      Which plot threads are that? I genuinely can't remember.

  16. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I don't think it's the definitive superhero comic because it has an ending, and a core part of the superhero genre is that it's a NEVER ending battle of good versus evil.
    The fact that Mark was allowed to grow and change and have those status quo changes stick so much is antithetical to the greater genre. I think it's an improvement, but it's not something that you're gonna see happen to most of the big name capes.

  17. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >definitive superhero comic

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *