If you mean they came up with some wild off-the-wall stuff, then yes, I'd agree. I think the 1970's and 1980's saw the rise of some very intelligent and inventive material, but also very fun material.
There's a lot of stuff done these days that I consider an unimaginative re-invention and re-tread of that better era. Such as Didio and Giffen's OMAC re-tread, or the 12-issue FF:THE WORLD'S GREATEST COMIC MAGAZINE. Or stuff on the Marvel side like DAREDEVIL: RED, or HULK:GRAY, or SPIDER-MAN:BLUE. Or the stretched out crossover event with Spiderman clones, that was ultimately just an exploitative re-tread of the clone story done in the 1970's.
All these stories and many more give a reference to popular stuff from that earlier era, but really offer nothing inventive or new. Another I re-read recently were the "Marvel Monster Group" re-treads from 2005 of the pre-Marvel monster stories (single one-shot issues in a mini-crossover of DEVIL DINOSAUR, MONSTERS ON THE PROWL, FIN FANG FOUR and WHERE MONSTERS DWELL, plus an all-new NICK FURY'S HOWLING COMMANDOS six issue series). I wanted to like all these series, but they are just a re-invention of stories that have already been told, with very little new added to the equation.
They are intended to exploit the nostalgic love by older readers for the earlier material, but ultimately just cheat the reader and add nothing new to those earlier stories.
The same with Neal Adams' recent BATMAN: ODYSSEY and new DEADMAN six-issue series. They give reference to the earlier better stories, but are themselves unimaginative and substandard. I prefer that 1956-1990 period, where they actually were coming up with new ideas. And weren't afraid to tell a complete story in 8 or 12 or 25 pages. Whereas now they'll stretch that story into a 6 or 12-issue series, to fill a collected trade. As opposed to actually giving us 6 or 12 well-told and original stories.
