D3's Comic Blog

How I Spent My Zombie Vacation - Season 2 of The Walking Dead

2011-10-20T17:14:00.000-07:00

All right - so the much hyped "The Walking Dead" season two finally aired. I also watched "The Talking Dead" and heard what some dudes (and creator Robert Kirkman) thought. I had some thoughts on the show as well. What are they? Glad you asked - although you may not be...

Overall, it was a typically good show. I loved the zombie herd, and how the living managed to escape unscathed (mostly) - especially Daryl's actions to save a guy he probably thought about killing himself. When the blood started to flow, I thought that was it for T-Dog, but he lives to run another day after spending some quality time up close and personal with a dead zombie.

I also loved the interaction between Dale and Andrea - It was clear something was up between them, and the show did a good job of getting it out in the open and moving on.

Now for the things I didn't particularly like. I thought the episode spent way too much time on the search for Sophia. Now, I'm not saying don't search - quite the opposite. But this is a TV show - cut to the chase, man. Some of the sequences that occurred during the search were interesting (gutting a zombie, the exploration of faith by different characters at the church), but as a whole...it dragged on a bit. And then they still hadn't concluded the search by the end of the show? This seems to me to be an unnecessary cliffhanger. There are plenty of other things going on to keep us coming back.

I was also not too wild about the scenes with Shane and Lori. Sure, there's reason for these two to be at odds with each other, but her pushing Shane to leave the group and Shane's nastiness to Carl didn't ring true to me. Of course, I've never been chased around by a world of zombies, so what do I know?

I just thought that if Shane had an issue with what went down, he ought to keep the discussions and nastiness between the adults. And how could Lori encourage Shane to leave the group and head off by himself? That just sounds like banishing him to die, as he'd be on his own and most likely become a lunchable for a pack of zombies, as he'd have nobody to help him or watch his back.

Finally, the scene with Shane, Rick and Carl in the woods. The setup was obvious - something was going to happen. I was wondering if the deer was going to attack Carl or something like that. I didn't expect Carl to get shot. And why, if Lori dislikes Shane as much as she does, and if she's not thrilled with how meanly Shane was treating Carl, did she let him go along?

But I did enjoy the episode, and am looking forward to the upcoming installments. This is easily one of the best shows around. But since I am actively interested in about 3 or 4 shows, I'm not really sure how much weight my endorsement would carry.

As for "The Talking Dead," I thought the best part was the behind the scenes stuff and the interview with creator Robert Kirkman (a comic book writer, not a graphic novelist, despite what they kept saying). The one takeaway that I got from the show was that Robert Kirkman reminded me a lot of Philadelphia Eagles head coach Andy Reid - in his appearance and mannerisms. Maybe that's just me.

They showed a clip of the next episode, but it was hard to put it into meaningful context. I'd wager to say that that clip didn't change anyone's mind as to whether or not they'd watch next week. The show is good enough to keep us coming back. It was also interesting to hear Andrew Lincoln speak in his real, british, voice. Quite a contrast to Rick's accent.

It's nice to watch a show that is able to give the viewers solid writing, solid acting, over the top gore, classic suspense and enough compelling characters and plot threads (without overdoing it) all in one show. It's really too bad there aren't more shows like this!

Given the success of the show, can a spin-off called "The Real Housezombies of Atlanta" be far off? I bet it would be at the top of many must see TV lists. Hell, I know I'd watch.

Disney Goes All Galactus On Marvel

2009-09-15T20:10:00.001-07:00

That's right - for $4 billion dollars, Disney acquired Marvel Comics. Ate the entire Marvel World and is sitting pretty, just waiting for those movie bucks to start rolling in. The only real problem is that $4 billion capital outlay. Maybe Disney can get a bridge loan from Tony Stark or Bruce Wayne.

Some people have asked me what I thought of the deal, and I have to admit, I am somewhat indifferent. It's been a while since I have actively followed Marvel (or comics in general), so I don't have a real feel for this in the sense of the here and now.

Is it the worst thing that has happened to Marvel? Not likely. And I'll skip the silly, obvious jokes about Mickey Mouse teaming up with Wolverine. That's pretty sophomoric and trite, and, frankly, beneath me. Hahahahaha! Better to avoid it simply because that ground has already been covered. And besides, there's already been an Archie/Punisher comic book, so how bad could a Mickey/Logan team-up be?

Actually, this could be a good thing for Marvel. I think it's been a while since they were the company that was publishing the kind of comic books that got me interested and - more importantly kept me interested - in comic books in the first place. A lot of the characters that I grew up reading are so radically different now, it's like they are different characters.

The Hulk is red. Captain America is dead. Spider-Man is unmarried and single. Who are these guys???

For me, the trouble all started when Marvel forced Peter David off of the Hulk. It was a well-written, very enjoyable comic book - one of the few Marvel had at the time - and they forced Peter David off, to make room for a reimagining of the character by John Byrne. Which lasted all of 10 issues and had very little impact. The Paul Jenkins and Bruce Jones stuff that followed was moderately interesting. But then David was back for a few issues. What gives??? Forget that his run was long, never lacking for interesting ideas and never should have been halted...why did they feel it was the right thing to do to bring him back???

Then along came what I think was the the turning point for me and my love of comic books - Ultimate Spider-Man. At first, it seemed innocuous enough. It was a refreshed retelling of the Spider-Man legend with a new, contemporary take, complete with snappy dialogue and a revamped/bolder Peter Parker character. Kinda like what Man of Steel did except that it was written better.

So Brian Michael Bendis changed a few things, but essentially retooled a character's history that didn't need to be retooled. Among the changes was the removal of Gwen Stacy from the developmental years and the idea that Mary Jane Watson knew from an early point that Peter was Spider-Man.

The influence of the Ultimate series can be seen in the Spider-Man movies, as the canon created in Ultimate Spider-Man was the underlying schema used - as opposed to the original Stan Lee version which was the lifeblood of Marvel's flagship character for the 35-odd years prior to the movies coming out. Forget about all that crappy history - and the fact that Amazing Spider-Man was still ongoing and building on that history - we want the clearly superior (sarcasm heavily implied) Bendis version!

But I digress. I started out talking about Disney buying Marvel and have ended up covering old ground about some things I dislike about the current state of comics. Although perhaps this rant is somewhat pertinent here. I wonder if things would have been different if Disney had bought Marvel about 10 years ago instead?

Perhaps Disney would have recognized the value of that rich history that goes along with all of the great Marvel characters. They'd probably have steered away from such storylines as the Peter/Mary Jane marriage problems (which was painfully boring to have to read), which would have, in turn, steered us away from some of the half-baked plots that marked the post-renumbering Spider-Man issues.

Yeah, that's the ticket. At least, that's what I can tell myself. I can only hope that Disney's influence will help stabalize what was once a great world of characters. That the comics that will be produced now will maintain the connection to the past, rather than trampling on it and changing it at every turn. Perhaps this is closed-minded of me to prefer no changes, but I just want to enjoy - I mean really enjoy - reading comics again.

And it seems that the only way I'm going to be able to do this is to re-read older comic books.

And don't even get me started on my issues with DC Comics. That's fodder for another curmudgeonly post.

More recent posts can be found on my new blog

How I Learned To Love (Well, Appreciate) Thor

2009-07-26T10:10:00.000-07:00

When I was younger, Sluggo and I would argue the most mindless, mundane minutae of comic book lore. We'd argue over who was the best comic book artist. Who was a better character. Which titles were good and which ones weren't. Whether or not some random plot point was totally stupid or only marginally so. I miss those stupid arguments sometimes...

Anyway, there were two arguments that never failed to spark up considerable dialogue. The first was which of us was the better artist, because - of course, in true fanboy fashion, both of us felt we should be comic book artists someday. There were many random "I can draw better than (insert name)!" This argument went on for a while until I decided that perhaps I'd rather be a writer. I still think I could have been a damn fine artist.

The second was "Which character is better?" And it frequently came down to Spider-Man (me) or Thor (Sluggo). Forget for a moment that Sluggo would pronounce O-din as Odd-in and refused to accept it when I would correct him. This argument was based purely on who was stronger. If it was based on which character had a better run of comics, Spidey wins hands down. It was pretty lean between the Stan Lee and Walt Simonson runs.

That's right - the Simonson issues. Other than the Lee issues - in my mind - the only significant run of Thor issues even worth looking at. After years of trying to convince me that Thor was great, Sluggo hits me with Thor 337. Look at the cover. It's ridiculous. Some weird lookin' dude in a Thor suit smashing the Thor logo. Big deal.

"It's great," Sluggo tells me. And he was right.

By the end of it, I wanted to see what happened next. Usually anytime someone tried to pick up Thor's hammer, they were unable to due to their unworthiness. Now here was Beta Ray Bill, not only picking up the hammer, but being summoned to Asgard by the All-Father (Oh-din) instead of Thor! What's a Don Blake to do?

And it got better from there. On to Beta Ray Bill getting his own hammer, fighting alongside Thor and just being a part of some really cool stories. Add in a french fry that 'kills' someone, a Casket of Ancient Winters (and a mortal who is entrusted with a centuries-old god legacy) and a Thor Frog, and - by Sigurd Jarlson's Beard, you've got something.

It was just the right mix of quality art, great storytelling, Norse mythology and just plain fun. A comic, that, just like Keith Giffen's Justice League, had a ball telling great stories without getting mired in the grim & gritty thing. Comics were meant to be escapist fun, and Simonson's Thor was just what the doctor ordered. The run even includes a hilarious Bob Layton fill-in issue that pits Thor against Hercules and is just as enjoyable as the Simonson issues.

In my opionion, it holds up very well when compared to today's comic books. Especially recent Thor comic books. And, while I haven't even flipped through a Thor comic in a few years...I doubt I'd like what I'd find.

So I thank Sluggo for introducing me to this great comic book run, and I thank Walt Simonson for creating it in the first place. If you haven't read this before (Thor 337-382), and you plan to do so - I envy you. You are in for a real treat.

More recent posts can be found on my new blog

Tales From The Basement: What Marvel Zombies Missed

2009-05-08T10:46:00.000-07:00

I'm sure the phrase "Marvel Zombie" isn't going to make readers (if there are any) of this blog scratch their heads and wonder what the heck it is to what I a refer. In a nutshell, if you were reading Claremont/Byrne X-Men, Miller Daredevil, Stern/Romita Jr. Spider-Man or any of the other fine Marvel comics being produced in the early 80s, chances are you were a Marvel Zombie.

If you were also unaware that DC Comics, First Comics, Comico, Aardvark-Vanaheim and Eclipse Comics were producing comics at that time, chances are you were a Marvel Zombie. This post will concentrate on a few of my favorite titles from this time that were produced by DC.

All-Star Squadron

I think this debuted in 1981. What I remember most about All-SS (can't really abbreviate this one by it's first letters, now can I?) is that it featured, introduced and/or re-introduced a lot of cool characters that you didn't see all that often. Characters that have since become part of the DC canon. In my opinion, JSA writers/resurrectors James Robinson and Geoff Johns should have been thanking Roy Thomas in each and every issue of JSA.

You shouldn't be surprised to learn that Roy Thomas was the writer of this great series, and Rich Buckler and Jerry Ordway were among it's artists. The stories were classics - set during World War II, every issue oozed with authenticity. If I hadn't known better, I'd have sworn these comics were written in the 1940s. The Joe Kubert covers probably helped to promote this perception.

Roy Thomas was no dummy - he used a tried-and-true comic book trick by having the book cross over with the Justice League of America title, thereby guaranteeing exposure to a much larger audience. The good news is that the story was so good, even if you were not reading All-SS prior to that crossover, chances are you were afterwards.

What was most interesting to me is that Plastic Man was a pivotal character in this series. He was a federal agent of sorts who was sorta responsible for forming the team. I have always been bored by Plastic Man. I don't think that the writers ever took him that seriously. And I keep hearing about how he is the most powerful character in the DC Universe, but I never see this. And I thought that Frank Miller (whose work I usually really like) made him look like a total doofus in the Dark Knight sequel.

Anyway, some of the cool characters we were treated to were Johnny Quick, Liberty Belle, Firebrand, Steel, Robotman, Tarantula, the Alan Scott Green Lantern, the Spectre, Baron Blitzkreig, Per Degaton, the Ultra-Humanite, Cyclotron and Hawkman just to name a few.

The best part of this series is that it doesn't seem to have resonated with many people as it did with me. The stories are great and the art is great. If you are looking for a decent title to read that offers excellent team-oriented tales and a timeless storytelling style, go ahead and get some issues of All-SS. It compares very favorably to the Marvel output of it's time.

In fact, I liked this title so much, I forgot that I had already written about how good it was.

Batman & The Outsiders

Nowadays, most people probably think the Outsiders is an original concept. And it kind of is - but it's a derivative of the Batman & The Outsiders title that came about when Brave & Bold's 200th and final issue came out. Batman quit the Justice League and formed the Outsiders - a team of mostly all new characters that would be led by Batman.

As if this concept wasn't cool enough, it was written by longtime Batman Scribe Mike W. Barr (writer of the awesome Son of the Demon graphic novel) and drawn by long-longtime Batman artist Jim Aparo. From the getgo, I knew this was going to be one of my favorite all-time titles. Alan Davis became the artist in later issues.

The new characters were the sword-wielding Katana, the amnesiac Halo and the former prince Geo-Force. The established, but less used characters were Metamorpho and Black Lightning. The disparate characters were woven together expertly and Batman was convincing as the loner who suddenly wanted to lead a team.

Again, this title proved that good stories, good art and an understanding of your characters could work well to make a title that would hold up well more than 20 years later. Amazingly, these back issues also seem to have fallen through the cracks and can be had for a relatively small amount. But they're worth the effort.

Firestorm

This character, who was first featured in the Justice League of America and as a backup in Flash, had two attempts at a solo title. The first was in the late 70s and that only went 5 issues, a casualty of the "DC Implosion" which saw a good number of DC's titles killed in the late 70s.

The original 70s issues were written by the 3rd ever Spider-Man writer Gerry Conway and drawn by Al Milgrom. The second series, The Fury of Firestorm, was again written by Conway, but drawn by Pat Broderick.

It seemed to me that Conway was putting his take on Spider-Man, but calling it Firestorm. It read kinda like an updated version of the teen hero tales we were treated to when the original Amazing Spider-Man came out - interesting characters and pretty good adventures - and some cool villains to boot.

Ron Raymond went to school, dealt with a bully and graduated and went to college. The main differences were that Ron was popular, and the bully was the outcast, Ron was athletic (a basketball player) and he wasn't a top academic student. These are the sorts of changes that were implemented in John Byrne's Man of Steel miniseries and his subsequent Superman revamp, but I thought the concepts worked much better here.

More recent posts can be found on my new blog

A Few Words About the Mini-Series, Part 1

2009-04-14T17:56:00.000-07:00

I had read somewhere (can't find it now, so perhaps I imagined this) that Watchmen was one of the first mini-series ever produced. This got me to hop up on my semantical, nit picky high horse.

First: It technically wasn't a mini-series. At 12 issues, it is a maxi-series.

Second: It wasn't one of the first, either. I believe that distinction belongs to Contest of Champions. And then, there were a few mini-series - Falcon, Hawkeye, Wolverine, Punisher, Magik, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Power Lords, Sword of the Atom, Elektra Assassin, Thriller and Dark Knight - just to name a few, that were out there before Watchmen.

In fact, I think that two other immensely popular 12-issue maxi-series may have preceded Watchmen. Namely, Crisis on Infinite Earths and Marvel Super-Heroes Secret Wars.

And even though I dispute the use of the term mini-series and the implied timeframe of Watchmen, it made me bristle even more every time that Watchmen was referred to as a graphic novel. It was not a graphic novel. It is, at most, a trade paperback. It can't be a graphic novel because it was published as 12 individial comic books.

I can't decide if the people who use the term 'graphic novel' use it (a) to make themselves seem knowledgeable on a topic that they may only have to write about once in a while - whenever a movie based on comic books comes out, or (b) to make themselves feel better about the fact that they read and enjoy comic books.

It's no secret what the perception is of folks who read comic books. There is no shortage of movies and TV shows that promote the timeless - and quite frankly, lazy, uninformed and unchanging - perception of comic book readers. Even mega sucessful movies like Dark Knight, Sin City and Spider-Man haven't changed this percetion.

But, please, do some research. Find out what a graphic novel is before you lump anything to do with comic books into the category. Just because it's a comic book, doesn't mean it's a graphic novel.

I can forgive the mini-series / maxi-series thing. After all, this is purely a semantical concern anyway, and only true fanboys (and I use this term with affection) would even bother to note the difference. Just as long as you know that Watchmen was not "one of the first" mini-series...that's good enough for me.

D3's Thoughts on Watchmen

2009-03-12T20:49:00.000-07:00

Hrrm...

I am mixed on Watchmen the movie. It was good, and I wonder if I would have liked it if it wasn't based on the comic book. I don't think it would have been confusing, because I think Zach Snyder spent too much time filling in blanks. There wasn't much for the viewer to think about, because most things were explained in fairly short order. Too much exposition. And too much stop action - just let the thing roll....we're trained to watch fight scenes - just let 'em go.

Too much time spent on seemingly mundane details. Like how the blood got on the pin. We didn't need a stop action there. It would have been fine to show us that bit when Rorschach picked up the button on the street. Preferable, in fact, as I felt like he was hitting us in the face with it. He didn't need to stress that this was an interesting element. It was interesting, but not really THAT important.

There were a lot of good things about the movie, but there were also a lot of things I'd rather have seen done differently. I think that being so driven to follow the comic book became a detraction after a while. There wasn't much room left for originality. I also think that, while the Rorschach prison scenes were cool - they should have been cut...or cut down. And I thought it was a good contrast in the comic how Rorschach lied at first, and then was asked again later....and then told what was really going on.

Oh - and the scene where he killed the guy with the cleaver....way over the top. I thought all of the violent scenes were a bit much. Very little left to the imagination there. We could have filled in those blanks. And was it me, or were there many times with Dr. Manhattan when you couldn't get away from the fact that you were looking at a green screen?

I think it would have been better (or rather, I'd have preferred) to have had a scene where unknown persons (or even Ozymandius to... Bubastis , who knows?) were talking at the beginning of the movie about each of the characters. A kind of "In order to know how I saved the world, you must first understand how I developed the plan..." This would have saved us from the 'background' scenes of each character.

Speaking of Ozymandius, I thought he was painful. His speech patterns and pronounciations were maddening. I found it hard to believe that this guy had the plan to save the world.

I know there was a desire to give everybody what they wanted, but after about 2 hours, I was kinda like..."ok, let's wrap this up..." The fight scenes were well done, but too long. The one in the alley was overlong, but not as bad as the prison one.

Hmmm...still mixed. I guess I'm going to have to mull it over some more...I may update with more thoughts in the near future.

Sluggo's Watchmen Review

2009-03-09T13:59:00.000-07:00

Well the most anticipated comic book movie of all time came out this weekend and I decided that I should post my opinion.

I’m really conflicted about it. To start with, it is a very good movie. They are faithful to all of the important aspects of the plot and the imagery is total spot on. From a Sluggo point of view, the fight scenes in this movie are the best comic fights ever filmed. There is nothing about the movie that a casual viewer (one who is predisposed to like comic movies) will find off-putting. The performances of the bulk of the cast were near perfect, especially in the case of Nite Owl and Silk Spectre. Those are two of the more nuanced characterizations in the comic, in my opinion, when compared with more one note characters like Rorschach or Dr. M. Their chemistry is like the comic book story come to life. I especially found Nite Owl's transformation from dud to stud, to be handled believably, and I liked him a lot more than I did when I read the issues originally.

But this is comic books, so there must be some fanboy nitpicking. There is one characterization where the director (or actor, thoughI think it was probably the director) totally missed the mark, so much so as to make it hard to watch the character on the screen at times. This is where I should say something about SPOILERS.

Ozymandias in the comic book is the shining star of the Watchmen world; a GOLDEN mishmash of Batman and Captain America. He is so universally loved that he has his own line of action figures, which the movie makes sure to point out. But in the end, the movie totally fails to make this a believable persona. To begin with the character is lit in shadows in almost every key sequence in the movie; he is dressed not in a golden costume but some kind of washed out tan. Part of his costume was pink in the comic for god's sake.

And I realize that most of the audience knows the outcome, but is that any reason to telegraph his role as the villian, in HIS FIRST APPEARANCE on screen. He is visited by Dan and delivers a despondent discussion of the problems with the world. And the delivery of the actor is borderline comatose. In the final sequence, he does kick some serious ass, but still seems like he is on qualudes as he is doing it. And I personally couldn't wait for his signature line about not being a 1940s supervillan, but when it came he totally whiffed.

Whew, glad I got all of that off my chest.

Doctor Manhattan is a little off as well, in my opinion, by being too human of all things. When I read the book, I always felt he was more remote than is represented here. It worked OK in the movie, just didn't match up to my impression.

It's a lot more gory than it needs to be, but I guess this is the director's hangup (see 300). Still the action is really incredible.

In the end, I came away thinking it was very good, but I can’t help but compare it to the feelings I had walking out of Iron Man. I personally feel that Iron Man is the best comic book movie to date and I remember walking out of the movie knowing that. Of course, the material of Watchmen itself doesn’t lend itself to that kind of jumping up and down cheering; it’s similar to walking out of the Dark Knight. I told a friend after I left DK that it was so much I needed time to think about it. I eventually decided that DK was a great movie, but I personally prefer Iron Man. I think I’ll ultimately come to appreciate Watchmen like DK, but I can’t say that walking out of it, I unequivocally loved it.

Sluggo

And My Problem With The Oscars Is....

2009-02-23T07:35:00.000-08:00

Me. Or rather, the fact that I don't go to movies very much and so there is little going on at the Oscars to draw me in. So I don't watch. In fact, the only way I know what happened is to read about it or hear about it the next day.

In the past, I'd gotten a little upset about "slights" at the Oscars. I think of Annie Hall/Star Wars and Forest Gump/Shawshank Redemption/Pulp Fiction right off the bat. These are rare cases where I had actually seen all of the films involved.

Then in more recent years, it would be a good year if I'd seen two of the films up for best picture. Then I was down to one. And more often than not now, it's down to zero.

Which brings me to Dark Knight and Iron Man. Neither of which were nominated for any truly significant awards. Of course, Heath Ledger won best supporting actor, but I feel that this award was won more for Ledger's sake and the tragic situation of his dying, than his appearance in Dark Knight. Nay, I'd put forth that he won this award despite having been in Dark Knight.

I'd heard before I'd seen the film that Ledger was brilliant. And I agree. It was a masterful performance. And it's true that the film made tons of money worldwide. That doesn't necessarily translate to Oscar consideration.

If it did, Spider-Man would have won in 2002. And every Harry Potter film would also have won. I think that the Academy would rather not have the Oscars than turn their Dog Show over to these vile ruffian action/costumed adventurer films.

Expect the same thing to apply to Watchmen, no matter how good it is or how much money it makes. It will not be nominated for best film, best screenplay, best actor or any award worthy of note.

And that's fine. Comic books no longer need validation from outside sources. Just because Hollywood is making good movies out of comics, doesn't mean that comics are any more or less valid as an art form.

As a matter of fact, the overall horrendous and forgettable output of comic book films prior to Spider-Man tells me that Hollywood knew (or should have known) that they had some great potential material and a built-in audience. All they had to do was not screw it up.

They got it right with Superman, Superman II, The Rocketeer and The Crow. And I am sure there are few others I am forgetting, but for the most part...the years from 1978 to 2002 are pretty freakin' grim when it comes to comic book movies.

But that wasn't what they did. Comic books were for kids, so we're going to take the basic ideas and make movies that adults would want to see. This is the impression that I got, anyway. And the result was "movies that suck ass." And I am being kind.

Batman Returns was so bad, it tainted my opinion of Batman and made me ignore the next two Batman films. All through the 90s, anytime I heard a rumor that they were going to make a comic-book based movie, I hoped that it would never come to fruition. It almost seemed like they were only making (or trying to make) the movies to thumb their nose at comic books. They didn't take them seriously, so they could not have made good movies.

Now they can. There are fans making movies, and the studios are on board because of the money that flows in. People go to these movies and really enjoy them. They get big names for the comic book movies. And still, there is very little hint at the Oscars that they even exist.

And that's fine with me. If Star Wars and Shawshank didn't get an award, maybe it's proper that Spider-Man, Dark Knight and Iron Man didn't as well. I'll be happy as long as they make good movies.

I'd like for the films based on comics to be as memorable (or at least as respectful) as possible of the comics I have read and enjoyed. That's not asking for too much, is it?

"Essential" Comic Books

2009-02-01T10:58:00.000-08:00

I am a big fan of the Essentials books that Marvel has been putting out. I mean, what's not to like? All the classic Marvel comics, in 25-or-so issue bunches, for less than $20. It's not even the cost that is the most appealing thing. It's having all of the issues, in order, with none missing...all in one place.

Marvel Masterworks were cool beyond compare - hardback, full color, nice paper. But the two main drawbacks, in my mind, were the cost ($39.99 and then $49.99) and the fact that they only contained 10 issues at a clip. It wasn't a deal-breaker by any stretch. I have owned more than my share. They looked good on the bookshelf. And despite the kinda-high price point, it is still cheaper than buying the original issues.

Of course, the things that I really liked about the Masterworks are drawbacks in the Essentials series. They're black-and-white, softcover and use normal, newsprint-y type paper. But these are drawbacks that I can easily accept. The material contained therein more than makes up for any issues I could possibly have.

And the best part, for me, about both Masterworks and Essentials is that I don't have to worry about getting tape caught on the brittle original issues. It's great to have the originals, but it got to a point where I obsessed over the condition so much, it wasn't enjoyable to read the comics anymore. I'd rather not be faced with the prospect of opening a bag and taking a piece of a cover off with an errant piece of tape.

DC has also released their old comics in the Showcase books (I think that's what they're called). but I am not as enamored of these books as I am of the Essentials books. This is really only due to the fact that I am not really a big fan of the overall DC comic book universe prior to the 70s.

My ideal would be to have DC reprint the late 60s/early 70s Batman and Detective comics, the Neal Adams Strange Adventures issues along with his Deadman issues and the Superman run by Martin Pasko that covered issues 300-330. There are other things I'd like to see DC reprint, but these would all be at the top of my list.

My only complaint with Marvel is that they are not making them fast enough. The latest Spider-Man volume that I know of, volume 8, only takes us up to issue 185. Where's volume 9? I want to see the issues up to 210....any beyond!

And if Marvel is interested, I'll tell them what comics they should reprint next. Anybody other than me want to see the 19 issues of Human Fly reprinted?

The Geek shall inherit the Earth

2009-01-28T13:15:00.000-08:00

In the past few months, I can't help but look around and feel a tremendous sense of vindication. When certain people indoctrinated me into the world of comic books when I was in middle school, comic books and superheroes were largely deemed to be "kid's stuff" And anybody who read them was certainly categorized with a certain degree of "geek factor." I remember wondering how anyone who gave "The Dark Knight Returns" or "Watchmen" half of a chance, could not come away not thinking that they were cool as hell? I know that it was pretty tough to walk around school with a comic book in your bag and not be the butt of someone's joke.

I'd like to think that I was secure enough with myself that I didn't care, but who doesn't want to be popular in high school? I know I was part of a "comic book club" that met after school, but I also know I didn't advertise that fact to my friends who were jocks.

Of course, eventually you grow up, maybe go to college and realize that most people like something that is off the beaten path, and you learn not to care. Still, when I met my wife I can remember her trying to stifle a laugh when I told her I was a fan of comic books. My sad devotion to this ancient religion still annoys her as I argue with friends over some point of comic minutiae.

But the most amazing things has happened in the past few years.....the rest of the world finally caught up with us. It can be debated as to the reasons, whether it be computer sfx, the prevalence of comic readers in Hollywood, the influence of gaming, or some other factor, but comic books and superheroes are taking over the world. Spider-man, The Incredibles, X-Men, Iron Man, Dark Knight, Heroes, Lost (if you don't think this is a comic book, you haven't been paying attention), 300, and hundreds of others. In 2008, of the top five highest grossing films, 3 were comic book movies. And possibly most amazingly, Heath Ledger has been nominated for an Oscar for his role in Dark Knight. I know part of it comes from his untimely death, but still, 15 years ago, you could barely get a comic movie made; now they are worthy of Academy consideration.

Of course with this amount of content out there, there are going to be some missteps (Punisher War Zone?) but they have amazingly been pretty few and far between. And with every new movie or show that comes out, the geek in me wants to jump to my feet, raise my fist (thumb visible, of course) and shout "Vindication!"

And when I do, my wife inevitably shakes her head and laughs...

Dick Sprang Batarang Flies Again

2009-01-24T00:48:00.000-08:00

Have you watched the new Batman cartoon, The Brave and the Bold ? It’s been pretty darn good so far. When I first saw the commercial on Cartoon Network the initial double shock of a) a new Batman show and b) its a simplistic-looking Dick Sprang version of Batman (!), subsided into tingly anticipation. By all appearances, this back to basics take on this evergreen character held the promise of feeling fresh even while being rooted in a classic Batman style and opening the door to the DC Universe at large.

After the dark, cinematic Batman the Animated Series from the ‘90’s and the more recent grim, anime-influenced The Batman (with that cool opening theme by U2’s The Edge) it was an unpredictable and gutsy move to introduce a simplistic and slightly goofy looking animated version of Batman. Right away, you sense this is a youngster friendly Batman. In this case, that’s not a bad thing at all and the risky gamble pays off in dividends of sheer fun.

In just a few seconds, anyone familiar with Dick Sprang’s classic square-jawed Batman will recognize the obvious influence his artwork has had on the look of this show. It all harkens back to a simpler, more light-hearted era for both Batman and comics in general. Surely that was intentional. Clearly the show’s art style aims to draw younger viewers but fret not old timers, you haven’t been forgotten. The simple formula still works: solid storytelling + lots of action = loads of fun.

As you might have guessed from its title, the show uses a team–up approach guest-starring a different hero fighting crime along-side Bats every week. Not only does that help keep the stories self-contained and free from continuing subplots it also opens a revolving door of animated versions of all sorts of characters from the DC universe. The show’s creators wasted no time in bringing out classic characters both old and new including Aquaman and the new Blue Beetle. It was a little jarring at first to see a 1950’s style Batman side by side with a 21st Century version of the Blue Beetle but then it just gelled and became really cool in spite of feeling somewhat anachronistic. Being just a kid, Blue Beetle idolizes Batman and defers to his experience though that doesn’t mean much once his eagerness to show off kicks in. Since the new Beetle is, in my opinion, one of the best comics currently on the market I was quite pleased to see him guest star in more than one episode already.

Other guest stars include ye old king of Atlantis, Aquaman, who in this version is not above recounting his regal exploits ad nauseum and placing himself at the center of the story. Yet he remains quite likable in spite of his conceit. Wildcat (from JSA) also makes an appearance in an episode which I found more interesting because of who the “villains” were: The Outsiders! Keeping old traditions alive, the Outsiders start out as adversaries but you know how those tales always end. However, there were only three of them: Katana (best of the three in my book), Black Lightning, and a teenaged version of Metamorpho. Utilizing only three of the characters kept it simple and focused on the action which has really been the main thrust of The Brave and the Bold.

With fast-paced, action filled stories Batman: The Brave and the Bold puts the emphasis on fun which is something that the recent The Batman, with its cool visuals and music, fell short on. This opens the door wide open to bring Batman to a newer and younger audience while keeping us old-timers happy with classic characters and that old team-up charm. Here’s hoping The Brave and the Bold sticks around long enough to showcase some classic Jack Kirby characters like the Demon, James Robinson’s version of Starman, Booster Gold, or even Vigilante.

Watchmen Suit Settled - About Freakin' Time!

2009-01-17T11:09:00.001-08:00

After a few months of wrangling over the Watchmen movie, Warner Bros. and Twentieth Century Fox are finally finished fighting and are now ready to play nice, according to this Newsarama posting.

I love this wording: "Warner Bros acknowledges that Fox acted in good faith in bringing its claims, which were asserted prior to the start of principal photography. Fox acknowledges that Warner Bros. acted in good faith in defending against those claims. Warner Bros. and Fox, like all Watchmen fans, look forward with great anticipation to this film’s March 6 release in theatres."

Well, the fans have acted in good faith in putting up with false starts and rumors about this film for 22 years. Although, considering how bad comic book films were before Spider-Man came out, maybe the insanely long wait works in our favor.

And I'm so glad that WB and Fox are fans just like us. I'm sure they've just been dying to see Ozymandius, Rorscach, Nite Owl and Dr. Manhattan on the silver screen. They're probably so relieved to see this movie coming out that they'd say "forget the money - let's get this great story out there so everyone can enjoy it!"

Bwaa Haaa Haaa!

Add this immensely long wait to Alan Moore's complete opposition to the movie, and you've got quite a little story about a film that really looked like it would never be made.

What's most humorous to me is that Warner Bros has to shell out oodles of cash for the film rights to a property that was theirs to begin with.

The good news is that the stills and trailers are giving me a sense that the movie could actually be really good. It looks good, anyway. Considering all the buzz that's been building for the last year or so, it better be.

The Language Of Comics

2009-01-15T20:50:00.001-08:00

Comics, like any medium, has a feel and/or a language that is unmistakably germane to that particular medium. With the number of writers increasing exponentially these days, it's less recognizable now.

But--certainly, if you've read enough comics, you can pick a few of these gems out. Here are a few of my faves, in no particular order.

In the old days of the 70s and 80s, you could pretty much have a quote read to you from an issue and determine who the writer of the book was without ever having actually read the book.

* This'll make my rep!

This classic was always one of my faves, based solely on it's overall stupidity. It was big in the 70s, especially in Daredevil and Batman. There was always some dumbass henchman who reasoned that killing Batman or Daredevil would cement his standing in the criminal community and vault him into that penthouse suite where he could finally be the one to call the shots.

* The Die Is Cast!

This truly is one of my favorites, and I don't mean this in a sarcastic way. It's such a great phrase and it perfectly captures the essence of what comics - mostly Marvel Comics - were like in the 60s. It's a classic, and it's a shame that phrases like this are not used nowadays.

* I'm The Best At What I Do, And What I Do Isn't Very Nice

I'll bet that just reading that phrase brought up a big belly laugh. And I'll further bet that many readers will know who the writer was, who the character was and maybe even have a clear recollection of what that first page that featured these words looked like. Of course, after this was repeated in each of the four issues and beyond, it got a bit tired.

* What The--

Ooops! Almost said it, didn't you? Somehow nobody ever finished that one. It's probably for the best. Gives us readers a chance to use our imaginations. It's also a phrase that doesn't work so well when actually spoken. It just sounds silly.

* Avengers Assemble!

This is also a classic staple phrase of 60s Marvel, and another pleasant reminder of how great comics used to be. Especially after the wretched "disassembled" storyline a couple of years ago, it is always great to be able to revisit a pre-Joe Quesada/Brian Michael Bendis Marvel Universe. Sometimes you don't need to destroy the foundation to fix up the house.

* The Storay At Hand

Just kidding. Wondering if you were paying attention anymore. Although, to those who know of it, this one is a freaking classic! Right up there with "Die Scum...."

How could I have forgotten these gems??

* Still Only 25¢ !

A classic to be sure - not only does it call attention to the inevitable price increase, but it reminds me of a time when nearly every comic on the spinner rack was a good one! For whatever reason, Marvel didn't decree 30¢, 40¢ or 50¢ to be worthy of this designation (interestingly, 35¢ also merited this treatment). Well, it's certainly better than "Still Only 299¢!"

* Not An Imaginary Story! Not a Hoax!

Then why publish it? Honestly, is there anything that screams "DC Comics" more than this? It's great. And the stories that unfolded were truly the stuff of legends...and explain a lot in terms of why Marvel was able to take over the comic book readership in the 60s. If not for Neal Adams, Dennis O'Neil and Frank Robbins, the 1960's would be a very barren landscape for DC. From a pure nostalgia and cool character introduction point of view, however, this was a very interesting time for DC.

* Because You Demanded It!

Who could resist this? Like "Not An Imaginary Story", this little gem quickly lost all meaning, as it became evident that, well, nobody demanded some of that stuff. And since the Marvel No-Prize comic book poked fun at this in such an amusing fashion, I'll stop here.

* 'Nuff Said!

Short and to the point. 'Nuff indeed...

I'm sure there are many others, but for some reason or another, I can't come up with them. Feel free to add your faves.

The Golden Globes and the Dark Knight

2009-01-11T20:40:00.001-08:00

Wow - Heath Ledger won a Golden Globe for Best Actor for his maniacally brilliant performance as the Joker in the summer smash Dark Knight.

Finally, it seems that the moviemakers are doing something right and the 'experts' are taking comic book movies seriously. Took long enough. Superman and Superman II were hits in 1978 and 1980. Batman was a hit in 1989. Spider-Man was a mega-hit. Two more Spidey movies, The X-Men Trilogy, Sin City, 300, Iron Man...all made oodles of money and received critical acclaim. But none of these were nominated for any of the more prestigious awards - Best Actor, Best Screenplay...Best Movie.

Heath Ledger was getting a lot of attention and praise even before his untimely death. After he died, the buzz was, amazingly, upped a notch. I am glad he won, and after finally having seen the movie just this past weekend, it doesn't seem to me as though it was given only because of the tragedy of his passing. He was excellent. The performance was as good as it was billed.

I think that as long they keep making movies like Dark Knight, Spider-Man, Iron Man, Superman and Sin City - the Globes and Oscars won't be able to ignore them anymore - this can only be a good thing.

It will make the folks who are charged with making movies work even harder to gain that attention. It will make them more focused on the comic fans who go to the movies in droves.

After all, who was responsible for Watchmen finally getting made? Not Hollywood. Not really. They had no idea there was even a real demand for these comic book movies. Even after Superman. And Batman. And The Crow. Men In Black. Not until Spider-Man reminded them.

They kinda knew after Tim Burton's Batman. But then Joel Schumacher and his Hollywood types were seduced by the Dark Side. They couldn't get past the campy 60s Batman. They reverted to disrespecting form and nearly killed what was a promising genre of movies.

Now they're back. And they're getting better.

But for every Dark Knight and Sin City, there's a Catwoman, Elektra, Daredevil and Punisher lying in wait. Just like with any genre of movies, there will be some underwhelming options.

Comics themselves are no different. There are good ones and bad ones, and sales usually balances the scales. Comic books are at their worst when they get cocky. Sales are good, buzz is good, so they create new titles and overload the market. Eventually, things settle down and the core titles become the standard again.

As long as the moviemakers keep trying - and remembering the core, comic book-based audience - we should really be seeing more good movies than bad ones.

I can't wait to see what comes next. Right now, the newest offering is Will Eisner's Spirit, directed by Frank Miller. After Sin City and 300, people seem to have taken notice.

And to my way of thinking, as long as the Globes and Oscars start to really take notice of the comic book/action movie, it's all good.

Through The Past, Dorkily

2008-12-18T21:30:00.001-08:00

When I was a kid, I was so into comics, that I made my own. Most of them are pretty sad recreations of Spider-Man stories I'd read and, clearly, really enjoyed.

As one would expect, the art was crude and the story was primitive, limited and just plain...bad. It's interesting to see these efforts now (yes, I managed to save them all - are all comic book fans packrats?). Interesting and totally embarrasing at the same time.

However, I did have a more focused burst of creativity during high school in which I took one of the aforementioned "comics" from my past and inserted current (current = the 80s) events and current pop culture. It grew a life of its own from there, spawning multiple issues from me and even inspiring comics in the same vein which were written and drawn by my friends.

The result is, for me, laugh-out loud funny. The art is a bit better, but the writing, if I say so myself, is brilliant. The story is totally stream-of-consciousness, but it does, oddly, kind of flow. All the wonderful things about the 80s are there.

Rambo. Hulk Hogan and the Hulkamaniacs. Jacko (the Energizer guy). MTV and heavy metal.

I was on a roll. Well, perhaps. It's a very esoteric roll, but it's a roll.

After a while, it seemed only logical to start to insert the previously-referenced friends into the stories. And amazingly, I think the comics got better. I started to take on comic book conventions like panel layouts, standard writing methods and established speech patterns and cliches and motifs commonly found in comic books. And there was even a semblance of a plot.

Mostly, it was just reflections of a time. A slice of life, if you will. Maybe someday I'll post some scans and you can tell me it's utter crap, or if, heaven forbid, you'd want to see more. Of course, this would also mean that I think someone other than me is actually reading articles on this blog.

Anyway, I thought these comics were funny as hell. But maybe you had to be there.

Finally Finished Spider-Man 3

2008-12-14T18:11:00.000-08:00

Last year, I received Spider-Man 3, Batman Begins and Superman Returns for Christmas. This was from my brother, who couldn't believe that I hadn't already seen any of these films.

Then they sat, unwatched for a few months. I started watching Spider-Man 3, and wound up finishing it after a few months. I'd watched it in, maybe, 3 40-minute intervals.

I'd heard a lot of things about it. That it was too busy and that there was too much going on.

Now that I've seen it, I see that this opinion has definite validity. Green Goblin. Venom. Sandman. All in the same movie? Plus Curtis Connors, the man who would be the Lizard?

Sheesh. There was a lot going on. Some of it was cool and interesting. But mostly, I thought that this movie didn't have the same type of heart that the first two Spidey movies had. It just seemed like they were making it and then...moving on.

The fight scene at the end was pretty cool, but I was again turned off by Spider-Man being in a situation where he was having the snot beaten out of him. I'm not sure why Marvel seems to like this. Venom alone is an overmatch for him. Sandman is a tough foe foe him to handle. Together, it seems sensible to assume they'd finally win.

Enter the moping, misguided Harry Osborn. Finally the truth comes out. I remember in the comics, when Norman Osborn died, Spider-Man didn't remove Osborn's Green Goblin costume. Harry did. Spider-Man didn't care if the world - or Harry - knew what a monster Norman Osborn was. I liked that better.

I didn't like the stupid Harry hates Spider-Man undercurrent that started early in Spider-Man 2. It got boring pretty quick. It was a nice solution when they had the butler set Harry straight. But that reckoning was long overdue.

Then Harry further redeemed his mopey-ass self by flying into action and helping Spider-Man defeat Sandman and Venom. Of course, just like Terminator 2, it would have been cool if this scene had been approached from the vantage point that you didn't know Harry/Arnie was going to be a good guy in that particular scene.

You can imagine Peter's reaction when - as Venom restrains him, he's getting pummeled by the Sandman - and then Harry flies into view, with pumpkin bomb at the ready. And then...wow! He blows up Sandman and Peter and Harry fight side-by-side.

It's too bad Harry died at the end. I actually liked that version of Harry and would have liked to have seen him in Spider-Man 4.

So, overall, while I thought the film was too busy and used up too many cool villains in one shot, I liked it. It wasn't great - certainly not compared to the first Spider-Man movie - but it was good. Better than Daredevil. Better than Batman Returns.

And I am now eager to see what Spider-Man 4 will bring. What more can a comic book fan ask for?

Enough of Grim & Gritty Batman

2008-12-11T22:01:00.000-08:00

It's all Alan Moore and Frank Miller's fault. Ever since they wrote their Joker tales - The Killing Joke and Dark Knight Returns - The "grim and gritty" Batman was born and the Joker has taken on a life of his own.

The character took center stage in Tim Burton's 1989 Batman movie, representing - in my mind - the pinnacle of Jokermania. While Jack Nicholson did a serviceable job in the role, I don't think he captured the essence of the Moore/Miller version of the character.

And this is not to say that these two gentlemen were the first to write the Joker as a homicidal madman. Bob Kane started that, and the trend was carried down the line.

Frank Robbins was instrumental in jump starting the serious tone Batman would take on in the late 60s. Most people will say it was Denny O'Neil that did this, but it really was both of them. Robbins wrote just as many memorable and classic Batman stories as O'Neil did. Both worked with Neal Adams and both are writers whose work any and all Batman fans should seek out.

So - back to grim and gritty.

The latest entrant in this contest is The Joker by Brian Azzarello and Lee Bermejo. I've read some of Azzarello's work and I liked Bermejo's art in the hardly-ever-mentioned-but-highly-entertaining Superman/Gen 13 crossover book. Another title I recommend.

I read the Azzarello/Bermejo work and got exactly what I expected. A competent story and very good art. Unfortunately, like so many Joker tales before this, I didn't get anything new.

Joker's insane. Got it. He's been released from Arkham. Released. Ooookay....got it. He hooks up with some low level crook who becomes his right hand man. Then with Killer Croc.

Okay, fine. Not my cup of tea, but...fine. Then there's the whole Harvey Dent/Two Face thing and the Joker's interactions with the Penguin. Throw in an obligatory Riddler appearance and viola! - instant Batman rogues gallery. No Catwoman, though. Surprising.

It ends on a bridge with the crook getting himself killed and uttering something pithy along the lines of "there's no cure for the Joker. Only Batman." So Batman's just as crazy as the Joker, but he keeps the murder impulse in check. This is pretty much all I've managed to gather from this tome and all the other Joker tales that preceeded it.

Please - Batman writers. Please. Stop the grim and gritty. I'd like to see more Batman tales like the ones that Robbins and O'Neil wrote. Like the ones that Doug Moench wrote in the early-to-mid 80s and again in the early-to-mid 90s. Even in recent years, Judd Winick, Ed Brubaker, Greg Rucka and Grant Morrison have given me some of my most enjoyable Batman moments. I'd like more.

I don't want to read any more Joker tales. No more grim and gritty Batman tales.

And not to pick on Azzarello and The Joker (this should be more directed at the editor), but why did the Joker refer to the Penguin as Abner? More than once. Unless I am mistaken, he's always been Oswald Cobblepot.

Maybe Oswald wasn't grim and gritty enough.

Top 100 Runs: First Look - 96-91

2008-10-18T17:03:00.001-07:00

This is an interesting section of the list for me. First, here are the titles that were on the list from 96-91:

96. Denny O’Neil and Denys Cowan’s The Question
95. Kazuo Koike and Goseki Kojima’s Lone Wolf & Cub
93. Garth Ennis’ Hellblazer
93. Brian Michael Bendis and Michael Gaydos’ Alias
92. Warren Ellis and Stuart Immonen’s Nextwave
91. Mike Grell’s Green Arrow

I remember having The Question and Green Arrow: Longbow Hunters, but I don't own either anymore.

I have really liked a lot of Denny O'Neil's work (Batman, Daredevil, Amazing Spider-Man), but the Question just didn't grab me for whatever reason.

Similar story for Mike Grell - although I am considerably less fond of his work. I was pretty enthused about Longbow Hunters. It was heavily promoted and the word on the street was that this was a can't-miss, must have book. I found it to be severely underwhelming. The art was excellent, as one would expect from Grell. But I felt the story was kind of unispired and plodding.

I remember thinking the same thing about John Byrne's Man of Steel. It was nice to see that DC was thinking that the character in question needed an overhaul. But I felt that Byrne and Grell both fell short. That neither pushed the envelope. I thought that what they did was obvious. I didn't even pick up any of the Green Arrow series, because I was so disappointed in Longbow.

There are also two titles I haven't read on this list:

Lone Wolf & Cub and Nextwave. But I've heard great things about both, and will likely read them someday. Especially Nextwave, as it has the benefits of being a relatively short series by one of my favorite writers (Ellis). I do have some issues of Nextwave, but not enough to be able to read the darn thing.

Now - Garth Ennis and Hellblazer. I have enjoyed Ennis' work starting with Hellblazer. It was an accident that I'd even come across Ennis, as I was getting back issues of the Jamie Delano Hellblazers and Ennis just happened to be the next writer.

What I discovered was that I didn't really like any of the Delano stuff - in fact, the three issues during the Delano run that I did like were by Neil Gaiman and Grant Morrison.

Then Garth comes along and breathes life into this underdeveloped character. Until Ennis took over, I thought that Alan Moore had done more with John Constantine in a backup role in Swamp Thing than Delano had done with him as a lead character.

Giving Constantine cancer, coming up with a creative solution for Constantine promising his soul to a devil and Ennis' scathing take on the British monarchy was fresh and funny as hell. I only wish I'd kept reading further than issue 64. But I sure enjoyed what I did read, and this chance encounter led me to enjoy many more Ennis comics afterwards.

Alias was a lot of fun too. Again, I am haunted by not having the full series. I did have the first five issues, which were excellent. A plot to expose Captain America's identity? Strange, rogue agents and imminent death for Jessica Jones? Pretty cool stuff.

As usual, it was the pacing and dialogue that carried the day. You don't need me to tell you that Bendis does dialouge extremely well. The scene where Steve Rogers comes to see Jessica Jones and they have a chat about what went down was well done. Both characters shined. It's too bad that the character of Captain America was often not treated with this sort of respect.

Top 100 Runs: First Look - 100-97

2008-06-03T20:20:00.000-07:00

There were 12 runs mentioned (due to a few ties) in the opening of the discussions about the Top 100 best comic book runs. Please see my June 1st post for details.

I'll be looking at six of the 12. Here they are:

100 (tie). Chris Ware’s Acme Novelty Library
100 (tie). Doug Moench’s Master of Kung Fu
100 (tie). Jack Cole’s Plastic Man
99. Terry Moore’s Strangers in Paradise
97 (tie). Matt Wagner’s Grendel
97 (tie). Stan Sakai’s Usagi Yojimbo

Out of these, I have only read two: Master of Kung Fu and Grendel....so I'll limit my thoughts to them. As for the others, I must admit to a certain amount of closed mindedness, as I have little to no interest in reading any of them. A good friend of mine tried to get me to take the plunge on Strangers in Paradise, but I have yet to buy into that.

Now on to the ones that I have read.

Master Of Kung Fu: I came late to this title. I did not collect it as a kid, and only came across it because there was a near complete run in some quarter boxes at a shop that was moving to another location. Right time, right price.

I have long enjoyed Doug Moench's work - especially on Batman. He was the writer of record for most of the 80s and helped to define the character at that time. His work was overshadowed by such books as The Dark Knight and The Killing Joke, but I felt that his work stood up quite well.

Especially his run from about Batman 340-365, which crossed over to Detective 507-532. Don't quote me on that...I think they match.

Fun fact - in the 80s, the Batman tales were woven together between Batman and Detective, with the stories continued in each book and vice versa. So you could get two chapters at the same time, assuming shipping schedules matched up.

But this is supposed to be about MOKF. Okay - it was good...I liked what I read. And I felt that the issues that were produced after Jim Shooter was EIC were much better than the ones that preceded him. But, as I said, it was not something I collected when it was coming out. It was good...but it didn't become an instant classic in my mind.

Grendel: It amazes me to see this here. This was an amazing book, full of great stories and some intriguing artists. I wasn't wild about the Pander Brothers, but the story was excellent. Matt Wagner always seems to deliver quality work, and this was no exception.

This must have been caught in the pre-Image independent marketplace (it was published by Comico), where if it wasn't Marvel or DC...very few people read it. I was one of them. That same friend who tried to get me to read Strangers in Paradise succeded in getting me to read this. I am grateful that he did. You should try it as well.

If you like Matt Wagner's work in the 2K era, you'll love it in the mid-80s era as well. I can't recommend this title highly enough. I feel that it should be way higher on this list. I'd probably put it in the Top 50 at least. Give it a try - you'll see.

Top 100 Comic Book Runs?

2008-06-01T20:24:00.000-07:00

Yes, a poll was conducted (starting back in March) and votes were counted (I found this on comicbookresources.com) to list the top 100 all-time runs. Then writer Brian Cronin counted them down and offered intelligent commentary about each of the runs.

I am normally opposed to making lists of this sort no matter the topic, and I was especially dubious about this one. I just knew that it would be littered with what I would consider second-rate runs. I was right on that count, but it didn't matter once I got reading.

The main thing, I realized, was that people were writing about comics in a non-condescending way. Some contributors expressed genuine interest in comics in one of two ways: (1) They'd read the comics mentioned some time ago and they were now reminiscing about that; (2) They'd either heard of this run and never got to reading it...or they liked what they read here and now had an interest in seeking the comics out.

I personally can say that I have a good number of comics that I've bought over the years that I never got to read. While this is something to look forward to, it's unfortunate that this would be the case. I'm sure I'm missing some great books that are a stone's throw away from me.

Anyway - while the disagreement came quickly, I still could get a sense that this was simply fellow comic book fans talking about what they liked. And that's cool. After all, like in an election...how much could I really complain? After all, I didn't vote.

One of the things I'd hoped to do with this blog was to just talk about comics. What I liked, what I didn't like. I think I got a bit too focused on what I didn't like...or worse, what I did like. Either way, I think I missed out on the enjoyment associated with this great hobby.

I think I will try to use this list as a forum to zero in on great comics and offer some of my own fanboy insight. If I have a strong negative opinion, I'll try to tone it down. You can get an idea from the list at the right of this blog what sort of comic runs would be of interest to me. But I expect as I go through this list, I'll remember a good run that I'd forgotten about.

Or...even better...maybe I'll read something about a run I'd never considered...and the opinions expressed will make me want to seek that run out. Of course, that would increase the problem of "comics that I've bought over the years that I never got to read" -- but, what the heck...as long as it's a good comic, right?

Watchmen Movie Pictures

2008-03-11T20:34:00.001-07:00

I was hoping for something more. The pictures that were released for Watchmen are only making me feel that Alan Moore was right. Not that I doubted this, but I was hopeful.

The Comedian costume looked okay - not a bad start. Then it went all campy on us. Fake abs for Ozymandius? And I thought someone had sneaked a Batman photo in there, and that turned out to be Nite Owl.

Rorschach looked pretty good, but it's hard to mess up a guy in a trenchcoat.

What's up with these plastic costumes? What does Hollywood have against cloth?

I hope the pictures are not a real reflection of what's to come. Otherwise, we'll just have another forgettable comic book movie.

New Frontier DVD Movie

2008-02-26T21:25:00.001-08:00

Wow - that's cool. Justice League: The New Frontier has been released as a 75-minute animated DVD feature. This is another thing that I am interested in reading, but haven't had a chance to read yet.

I have a reason for not having read this one yet - I only have 5 of the 6 issues of the series....not a good reason, but it's a reason. I could always buy the trade, but I can't bring myself to do it when I am that close to completing the series. The pains of being a completist.

I have enjoyed Cooke's work, mostly from his time as artist of the Catwoman character written by Ed Brubaker. It started as a backup feature in Detective Comics (which, amazingly, was only a 4-issue run in Detective Comics 759-762. It seemed longer...), then DC launched a Catwoman title and picked up from that beginning. I'm glad DC was smart enough to do that. The backup stories were quite good and made for an excellent lead-in to the series.

I wonder if they're going to (or have already) collect these back up tales into a trade? It would be a worthwhile effort.

Grant Morrison's Seven Soldiers

2008-02-25T18:43:00.001-08:00

Well, I kind of got my wish...sort of. I've blathered in these posts about how all I really want from comics is for them to be well written. Now, with the help of a fellow comic fan, I have access to all of the individual issues that comprise Seven Soldiers.

This is a noteworthy aspect of this collection. It was something that I was interested in reading, as it was written by Grant Morrison, and it features obscure, forgotten characters. Just up my alley. Then I saw the trade paperbacks.

What a mess. They (DC Comics) reprinted mixed issues from each of the seven miniseries that are part of the overall SS concept. For example, the first trade could have had something like SS 0, Bulleteer 1, Klarion 1, Mister Miracle 1, Shining Knight 1 and Manhattan Guardian 1.

I know that Grant Morrison may have intimated that he had a plan as to the order in which the books should be read. But he's also the guy who complained to Marvel about fill-in artists on New X-Men when his choice, Frank Quitely, was apparently unable to keep up with the monthly schedule.

Note to DC: If you go to reprint Seven Soldiers again, please please please put all four of a particular mini series in the same reprint volume. Even if this is not the way the story is intended to be read...there's something to be said for cohesiveness.

So far, I have read all of the Bulleteer and the first couple of Klarion issues. I liked the Bulleteer a lot - it explores a lot of superhero traditions and stereotypes and puts some new perspective on things. Plus the Yanick Paquette art is quite good.

Klarion is also looking good, but it has the trappings of Morrison delving into the weirder aspects of an odd assortment of characters...which can sometimes result in good stories, but can also result in something like Doom Patrol, which I didn't like at all.

Still haven't read much of it, but I do like what I've gotten to so far. Based on Morrison's past history, I think I will enjoy this collection. I just need to find the time to read it...

Hulk: Better Green Than Red

2008-02-19T20:29:00.001-08:00

Oh for heaven's sake...

A red Hulk? And according to a February 18th USA Today article, the Jeph Loeb written tale centers on: "the Red Hulk, who may or may not be Bruce Banner and who is even more savage than the green version."

And Loeb himself says: "I wanted to bring a danger back to the book. The Red Hulk is the kind of Hulk we haven't seen before -- a thinking, calculating, brutal weapon-toting kind of Hulk. Everything the Green Hulk isn't, the Red Hulk is."

Hmmm - "the kind of Hulk we haven't seen before" huh? Let's review recent history. Specifically the time frame when Peter David was writing the Hulk. Starting with the great Gamma bomb chase/leader story through to when he introduced Mr. Fixit - who was the Hulk incognito, as much as that is possible.

Thinking - check. Calculating - check. Brutal - check. Weapon-toting - check. So all of these elements of the Hulk were well in place. So we have seen these characteristics before.

Didn't Loeb write the incredibly overrated "Hush" story? He's done a few things I've liked, but I think he's discovered an "inconvenient untruth" here. I understand that he wants to project like he has an original, great idea. But he doesn't.

I seem to also remember a Hulk story where there was a Rick Jones Hulk and a Hulk and a Bruce Banner running around all at the same time. Of course, it was only a matter of time before BB restored the status quo and returned us to the Bruce Banner/Hulk scenario once again.

That scenario has worked quite well for over 40 years - why mess with it now? I'd like to give the writers enough credit to assume that they have the talent to write good stories without rewriting the characters they chronicle. But with the recent events in Spider-Man, Captain America and the Hulk, I am wondering if I've held out too much hope.

I sincerely hope not - I'd still like to see well written stories that don't contradict all that went before. But that doesn't seem to be the current Marvel Method. Too bad - all they really need are good stories. They've had that before...and I hope they will again.

R.I.P. Fantastic Four - At Least For Me

2008-02-15T21:19:00.001-08:00

Well, I've only been half-heartedly picking up Fantastic Four books for the past few years now as it was. J. Michael Straczynski as the writer did not really scream to me as a reason to buy the book. Quite the opposite in fact.

Now Marvel has pretty much given me an out by announcing that Mark Millar is taking over. I've not liked anything that he has written. In fact, have found myself being totally indifferent to issues that he writes.

It's too bad - I'd be interested in seeing the Brian Hitch art. But I guess I can leaf through the issues at the comic book shop to see that. Also, if, as I suspect, these Millar issues wind up in quarter or dollar boxes (as Wanted, Ultimates and Ultimate X-Men have), I'll be able to pick them up for cheap.

At least I'll be able to save money and not wonder if I'm missing something. And my opinion of Millar's work is just that - my opinion. There is no thought that my viewpoint would be largely supported or even accurate.

As for "Kick-Ass" - which "takes the "What would really happen?" approach to the extreme" (this from a February 13th Dallas Morning News article), another Millar vehicle...I could not care less. It's been done. And it's not really interesting to me. Is it to anyone? Why do some writers feel so compelled to explore this?

Per the Dallas Morning News, it stars a character with no superpowers or special training who decides to fight crime.

What would happen? He'd likely die or get arrested. Not much of a story there, is there? Wrap it up in one or two issues. Can't wait for the movie to come out. Maybe they'll rewrite it and come up with an interesting angle. I'll wait.

The All-Star Squadron - An 80s Treat

2008-02-11T20:39:00.000-08:00

It was the early 80s - 1981 to be precise. Before James Robinson and Geoff Johns remembered all those classic 40s National Periodical characters.

Roy Thomas and Rich Buckler unveiled one of my favorite comic titles of all - the All-Star Squadron. The comics were set in the 1940s, during World War Two. They featured all these great characters - some I'd heard of and some I hadn't. And they created some new ones as well. All this, and some great Joe Kubert covers as well.

I rememeber the writing was really good - the characters came to life and the plots were very grounded. It had the feel of a comic that had been written in the 40s. Roy Thomas really did a nice job.

And it was fun to see some of these lesser characters on the stage. Robotman. Steel. Atom. Johnny Quick. Hawkman. Plastic Man. Shining Knight. Hourman. Liberty Belle. Spectre. Dr. Fate. Johnny Thunder. Just to name a few.

As the years went on, I thought the title might lose its steam. But the issues in the 20s were just as fresh and interesting as the earlier issues. And this continued throughout the title's 67-issue run.

It was sad to see the title finally quit, but I am sure readership did not warrant its continuance. Too bad, I thought. And I thought that was the end of it.

I was glad when James Robinson started writing comics based on these characters. He is such a good writer, and had done such a great job with Starman, that I was instantly interested. I didn't really know who this Geoff Johns guy was, but I figured...I'll give this a try.

Glad I did. And especially glad the JSA title took off the way it did. It's nice to see these characters in circulation again. And as much as I appreciate the efforts of Robinson and Johns...I don't think you can understate the influence of Roy Thomas and Rich Buckler.

Whatever - there are plenty of good comics with these great characters now. I'd recommend All-Star Squadron highly. Especially if, like me, you liked JSA.

The Last Y The Last Man

2008-02-09T19:47:00.001-08:00

Well, that figures. I saw an article in Publishers Weekly telling me that DC released the last issue of Y The Last Man at the end of January. So what if I just started reading it?

OK - I guess I'll just have to get the trades now and finish the read. I almost feel like I already missed the boat, so why bother? But the first couple of issues were good, and I am curious to see how the story developed...So, I guess that's why.

It's interesting (perhaps only to me)...As far back as I can remember (the 70s and early 80s), comic book titles just went on and on and on and changed creative teams as the years went on. I don't think it ever occurred to anyone to simply stop publishing a title when the well ran dry. This idea - which I think is a good idea - seems to be all the rage now.

Y The Last Man joins such favorite titles (of mine) as Sandman, Shade, Transmetropolitan, Starman, Supergirl, Captain Marvel (both runs) and Hitman in the pantheon of great titles that ran their course, and ended rather than turning the reins over to another writer. In some cases, the artist handled the art chores for the title's run.

There are a few titles, such as Animal Man and Aquaman (Peter David's) where this idea should have been employed.

And one title - Spider-Girl - that is still going strong (100+ issues) with the same writer (Tom DeFalco) for the entire run and with the same artist (Ron Frenz) in a majority of the run.

So, congrats Brian K. Vaughan and Pia Guerra for having such an interesting idea and for having the treat of being able to close it out on your own terms.

In this case, at least, we (creators and fans) all win.

Captain America - Reborn!

2008-02-04T19:32:00.000-08:00

Had to take a little time to digest this. It seems that Marvel has, yet again, decided that dramatic character change for the sake of change is better than producing good stories. It's not altogether surprising that Marvel made this move.

After all, their cowardly thought process (remember "Marvel claims that a married Spider-Man made life difficult for the comic's writers and has been a source of regret ever since the couple's big day in 1987"?) on the "One More Day" storyline in Spider-Man lends itself to this not-real-inventive storyline.

It seems the "House Of Ideas" has a new way of doing things: If things get tough - make some major change (i.e. kill someone, reveal an identity, injure a loved one) and move forward.

So it is that Bucky (the last "dead" person in the Marvel Universe) has now taken on the mantle of Captain America. It is kind of an interesting idea - but it's hard to say that it was hard to see this coming. I mean, it's like the 1986 mini-series "The Man of Steel" - what comic fan wouldn't have made those changes?

Some of the articles I am seeing are going on and on about Cap carrying a gun. I am not overly concerned about this. As always, I will doggedly cling to my stance that all I want is good writing.

I remind myself of how much I disliked the idea of Jason Todd returning in Batman, only to have Judd Winick win me over. Simply put, he took an idea that I hated and made me enjoy the hell out of it by writing such good stories.

Ed Brubaker has done this before. Catwoman was great. So was his Batman and Gotham Central work. And, lest I forget, Scene Of The Crime, my first exposure to his work.

I have faith that Brubaker will make me like this plot development in Captain America. And if not...I can join the annoying ranks of the naysayers who have been commenting on speculation. And while I am not above doing that, I will reserve judgment in this case. I hope to be pleasantly surprised.

A "Brief" History Of Captain America

2008-02-02T20:56:00.000-08:00

I've read Cap on and off over the years, and it's been pretty bleak for that character overall. Quite honestly, I've felt sorry for the Cap fan over the decades.

The 60s and early 70s weren't so bad. You had Stan Lee, Jack Kirby, Jim Steranko and Steve Englehart as creative forces. And before that you had Joe Simon and Kirby. That's not bad at all.

Then in rolls the mid-to late 70s. Here we get Frank Robbins art, a not-so-great Jack Kirby, a hit-or-miss J.M. DeMatteis (more miss than hit, but when he was good, he was very good) and Mark Gruenwald.

Let me step back a bit, as I don't really want this to be seen as me slamming these creators.

Robbins is a great writer - he did excellent work on Batman in the late 60s / early 70s, and along with Denny O'Neil, he helped recast Batman (I seem to be the only person noting that O'Neil was not alone in this effort) to be the great, dark character he is today.

Most will consider my assessment of Kirby here as comic book blasphemy. But I read CA 193-215...it wasn't pretty. Some interesting things in there, but mostly...just killing time.

J.M. DeMatteis had a lengthy run, with notable storylines including the Red Skull/Nomad story in issues 261-263, the Deathlok story in issues 276-279 (really good comics) and the Skull story that led into issue 300. Other than these issues, I don't remember much about the DeMatteis run at all.

As for Gruenwald, I seem to remember him justifying a lengthy, but largely uninteresting, run on CA by proclaiming that he was the longest-tenured of CA's writers. True and noteworthy for sure - but other than having Cap giving up his identity in issue 332, there isn't any truly classic CA tale to be found in his 100+ (not sure about this number) issue run.

The years from 1975 - 2008 weren't all bad. We had some great CA stories in the early 80s with honorable mention going to excellent writers Roger MacKenzie (pre-Frank Miller Daredevil guy) and Roger Stern (from about issue 220-255), and the aforementioned DeMatteis efforts.

Then, in the late 90s, came the excellent Mark Waid issues. Too bad that was so short-lived. I'd heard that Waid was really pumped about getting to write Cap. I'd also heard rumors that he was heavily interfered with by Marvel at the time. The readers loss, whatever happened. His run at the end of CA volume 1, and the first 15 or so issues of volume 2 were some of the best CA comics since the 70s.

And don't even get me started about how good Fabian Niceiza's Sentinel Of Liberty mini-series was. This may be one of my favorite Cap comic arcs ever. It was excellent and any and all Cap fans should seek it out. Since a lot of comic readers don't seem to know what a good story is, you might be able to find these issues in 50 cent/dollar boxes. Sad.

Then Cap went through a weird period where he couldn't sustain a readership. Or that's what I imagine must have been the case. I can't think of any other reason that Cap was stopped and started so much in the late 90s / early 2000s. I believe the Brubaker Cap is volume 5.

I've enjoyed Brubaker's writing on titles such as Catwoman and Batman, and I fully intend to get some of his Daredevil issues. And I've seen some of his CA work, and I liked what I saw. I don't have his entire run, so I have not had a chance to read much of it. But I look forward to it.

Except for the Winter Soldier / Bucky parts. But that's a subject for another post. This "history of Cap by a demented fan" post has already gone on too long. Sorry about that. To be continued...

Thinning Out

2008-01-31T19:33:00.001-08:00

I have been working on thinning out my comic vault for a week or so now, in an effort to create more space in the basement...at my very patient and tolerant wife's request. :-)

I was a bit reluctant at first, but once I started going through them, I saw that I'd accumulated some comics that I still hadn't read, and most likely would not be reading for quite some time, if at all. The main problem I found was that I'd gotten some comics for such a cheap price that I couldn't pass them up. They were by creators whose work I'd liked, so I figured ... why not?

Maybe there are worse things than leaving those comics in the box. Another thing I saw is that I'd have two or three issues of a mini-series, clearly bought at a greatly reduced rate in the hopes of someday getting the other issues. Someday never came. I'd still be interested in reading a lot of them, but the likelihood of me coming across the missing issues is pretty slim. So, out they go.

A somewhat related aside: I also found that there are Peter David comics I either don't like or don't care all that much about. I jettisoned some Dreadstar comics written by him. I did read them, and thought they were okay...I guess. For whatever reason, they just didn't grab me. They join the ranks of PD's Action Comics and Wolverine stints, as well as Sachs & Violens. I still own S&V, and I suspect that this is due to equal parts the great George Perez art and the fact that I think that I SHOULD like these comics.

If you've read previous posts, you know how much I like Peter David's work, so this is hardly an indictment of PD. But I didn't feel compelled to hang on to these comics. It happens. But all is not lost - I truly like the vast majority of what he writes, and will continue to buy comics he writes.

A good thing about this purge is that this might enable me to get to reading some of the other comics I've acquired that I haven't read, but that I really want to read. Ones that I have the whole series, or ones for which I have a good, long run. Ones that I looked at once more and was reminded that I had some good things still to read.

I wonder if I'll actually miss any of the comics that I packed up to be sold? I kinda doubt it. But if I do, I know where to go to reacquire them.

Great Reads - Y: The Last Man - New To Me

2008-01-27T20:44:00.001-08:00

After lending it to someone and getting a rave review, I just this weekend read the Y: The Last Man trade paperback. I agree - it was excellent and worthy of the praise that the trade boasts. The person to whom I lent the trade is seeking some more trades to read more of the story. If that happens, I'll be borrowing from him.

I will also check my library - they have a good selection of trades (I will not call them graphic novels, no matter how much newspaper writers want me to) and I think there's a good possibility that they'd be available there.

I hope so - I'd like to read more while the story is still fresh in my mind. Kudos to writer Brian K. Vaughn for writing a compelling story and not overplaying the hand.

Heath Ledger As The Joker

2008-01-23T21:44:00.001-08:00

It's such an odd thing to write this post. It is surely not my intention to trivialize the passing of Heath Ledger. I have enjoyed a few of his films - "10 Things I Hate About You" and "Monster's Ball" being the two that I have seen. I think it would be unseemly of me to gush about Mr. Ledger.

Instead, I'll state the obvious and say that it is sad that he has died. Especially sad for fanboys like me who were enthused about the forthcoming Dark Knight movie. Much like the feeling I get when I think about the Crow, and how I always think about the death of Brandon Lee...now I will have that same eerie feeling about "The Dark Knight."

"An out-of-control psychopath, sociopath, cold-blooded, mass-murdering clown" was the way Mr. Ledger described the Joker. Sounds to me like he did his homework.

I look forward to seeing this film. It sounds like Ledger really nailed the role, and it should be fun to see this version of the Joker brought to life. I'll be especially appreciative of having the Jack Nicholson Joker pushed back to the recesses of my mind and supplanted with this most recent edition.

Two days before his death, the UK tabloid The Express on Sunday ran an article on Heath Ledger (the above quote was borrowed from that). In the article, among other things, he confessed: "I've never been a fan of comic books and I actually hate comic-book movies – they're mostly just dumb and they bore me. But I thought Batman Begins was very well directed by Chris Nolan and Christian Bale was great in it. I liked the world they created."

Based on the stills and the previews...I'm glad he was able to get past this dislike. Rest in peace, Mr. Ledger.

Gail Simone And Wonder Woman

2008-01-19T21:45:00.001-08:00

Talk about your non-issues. Starting in December, publications as noteworthy as The Straits Times, The New York Times, The New York Sun, The Chicago Tribune, The Globe and Mail, and Newsweek have hailed the fact that Gail Simone has taken over the writing of Wonder Woman.

They have used stupid headlines like "Holy Hot Flash, Batman! Make room in the boys’ club, Caped Crusader. After 66 years, a woman takes over ‘Wonder Woman.’" and "Wonder Woman gets a new voice, and it's finally female" in this effort.

The first one is just downright insulting to any comic book fan. And the second one is, at best, inaccurate, since novelist Jodi Picoult had a turn as writer. I have not read her issues, but reviews I have seen have implied that the issues were less than spectacular. Whatever - so it wasn't her cup of tea.

The main point here is...what's the big deal? Simone has written many comics over the years, and she is not a stranger to female characters, having written so many good issues of Birds of Prey. And stop mentioning that she used to be a hairdresser! Every article mentions this - it's not relevant since the articles are about her writing comics! She writes comic books (and very good ones at that) - give the woman her due!

Is it really so astonishing that a woman is writing comics, let alone Wonder Woman? It's true that WW has not been real good over the years. But the Greg Rucka issues were pretty good. This indicates to me that the real problem isn't one of the character needing a female writer...as much as it is the character needs a GOOD writer that will take Wonder Woman seriously.

Many men have written female characters in very positive ways. I think of Neil Gaiman's Sandman, Peter Milligan's Shade and Peter David's Hulk run when I write this. And the female writer isn't new to comics either. There was Jo Duffy, Ann Nocenti, Louise Simonson, Collen Doran, Christina Z (whatever happened to her?) and Devin Grayson.

Maybe there is a shortage of female writers in comics, but let's be honest...up until a few years ago, there was a severe shortage of female readers! In the 80s, it seemed the only place you'd find female voices in the (now forgotten) letters pages was in Cerebus and Sandman.

That is changing, ever so slowly...and the proliferation of independent comics will only fuel that fire. DC Comics has provided a forum as well. Grayson had a few good runs, on such noteworthy titles as Gotham Knights, Nightwing and Catwoman. As mentioned before, Simone did a great stint on Birds of Prey and produced the excellent Villains United miniseries. All of these works are very much recommended, by the way...

I would think that readers should celebrate the fact that a writer of Simone's demonstrated skill is writing Wonder Woman. The fact that she is a woman should be a secondary consideration...but given the amount of articles I've seen on the subject, that is, apparently, not the case. That's too bad. Nothing should overshadow a comic book that offers top-notch writing.

Closing Argument On "One More Day"

2008-01-15T17:12:00.000-08:00

I promise. After this, no more about this unfortunate storyline. These are two points on the Spider-Man white-out story:

1) Marvel has implied that having a married Spider-Man made life difficult for the comic's writers and has been a source of regret ever since

2) Per the Guardian newspaper Joe Quesada stated: "my job is to keep these characters fresh and ready for every fan that walks through the door, while also planning for the future and hopefully an even larger fan base."

So here are a few conclusions to be drawn from that:

1) Long time Spidey fans - you're done. We don't need or want you. All that stuff that Stan, Roy, Gerry, Len, Marv, Denny, Roger, Tom and David put down is history. If you have the back issues, great...but it didn't happen.

2) When will Utlimate Spider-Man replace Amazing Spider-Man? I expect that in another year or so, Marvel will announce that Amazing is dead, to be replaced by Ultimate Spider-Man.

It's interesting to note that there is a thought that the characters need to be kept "fresh" and"ready" for an "even larger fan base." I wonder which fan base is larger? The one that has been kicked to the curb...or the one that thinks that Mary Jane was Peter's first love?

I had a conversation with someone recently who was surprised to hear that Mary Jane was not only not Peter's first love, but wasn't even included in the first 40 or so Spider-Man comics. Even Gwen Stacy was introduced sooner than MJ. Sure, MJ may have been mentioned prior to Gwen, but she was never shown until after.

Then Gwen was introduced (kinda shoehorned) into the Ultimate Spider-Man comic - why? She just wound up dying. I would have been more interested in seeing her live and see what sort of stories could have been hatched. I guess she and Karen Page weren't "fresh" enough characters.

I think it's interesting that this decision to eradicate the 800+ stories that built the legend of Spider-Man seems to have been made because the creative efforts coming from the Marvel bullpen are not able to generate worthy stories about an adult Spider-Man. You question this conclusion? Here's the wording from the Guardian again: "Marvel claims that a married Spider-Man made life difficult for the comic's writers and has been a source of regret ever since the couple's big day in 1987"

It's difficult...so we give up. That's how it goes down? So much for embracing a challenge. David Micheline wrote some interesting stories right after the marriage occurred. So did J.M. DeMatteis (remember the excellent "Kraven's Last Hunt?). But it (the marriage) was a source of regret. I won't say that it was a great story. It seemed forced. A stunt thrown out there to generate interest and push sales up. The stories that directly preceded the marriage certainly didn't indicate that something like that was coming. But it happened.

Besides all that, I thought the whole point of Ultimate Spider-Man was to target the younger audience. You know, tell stories that have already been told but in a snarky, generation-Y sort of way...Familiar characters with a new coat of paint. Clearly, it had Marvel's unending support, as elements of it heavily influenced the Spider-Man movies. Notice how MJ is Peter's first and only love in the films? It wasn't that way when Amazing was the main game in town.

I heard that Ultimate X-Men has been cancelled. Good for you, X-Men fans. Your memories will remain intact. All that transpired to make you enjoy the X-Men these many years remains intact.

As for you Spider-Man fans? There is one more conclusion to be drawn from all this. Marvel smiles...Thanks for all the dollars you threw our way. And thanks for your opinion (not that anything is going to change). Now shut up and leave us alone. The old order changeth. 'Nuff said.

More recent posts can be found on my new blog

Superman's Birthday!

2008-01-14T20:28:00.001-08:00

Okay, so I'm a few days late...sorry big guy. I saw two things related to Superman that caught my eye.

The first was a line in one of those "IT WAS ON THIS DAY IN HISTORY" articles (for January 10): "in 1939 comic strip SUPERMAN debuts" - wow. Cool. Nearly 70 years ago now.

Congratulations are in order for Superman's creators, Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster. I am not even going to get into the injustices done against these two men nor will I mention how they were hoodwinked out of the millions of dollars that was rightfully theirs. History will show forever that these two men created an iconic, world-renowned character that stands for "Truth, Justice and the American Way."

Yeah, it's corny...but it's great stuff, isn't it? Thanks, guys.

What was the second thing? An amusing "imaginary tale" article in The Sydney Morning Herald, telling an "Earth-Ha" tale about the creation of Superman, from Siegel's perspective. It ran on January 11th, and the writer is Charles Purcell. Look it up if you have the chance. It's pretty funny and worth checking out.

Here's my favorite line: "Plus a giant S on his chest - for Siegel."

Happy Birthday, Superman!

Bob Layton and Iron Man

2008-01-11T20:49:00.000-08:00

How cool is this? Marvel will apparently be releasing collected editions of the excellent David Michelinie / Bob Layton Iron Man tales from the 80s. How nice to be able to write something positive like this in light of the goings on in the Spider-Man books.

I read about this in an article in the Dallas Morning News, and credit must be given to the article's writer (Dan Koller) for mentioning these classic IM tales: "Demon in a Bottle, in which Iron Man's secret identity, Tony Stark, struggles with alcoholism; Doomquest, in which Iron Man and Dr. Doom travel through time to Camelot; and Armor Wars, in which Iron Man hunts villains who secretly benefited from his technology."

It will be great to see these stories again. And I hope a new generation of comic fans can get an idea of what really good comic books are all about.

But wait! There's more, per Mr. Koller: "But Layton and Michelinie also have two new miniseries due out in the spring: Iron Man: Legacy of Doom and Iron Man: The End. In addition, Layton has been asked to write a foreword for an Iron Man coffee table book and to draw several Iron Man trading cards."

I don't know about you, but I will be looking for both of these miniseries. Anyone who has even the slightest interest in Iron Man should join in to celebrate two of his most important creators. Nice to see one of the old guys getting deserved credit. Nice goin' Mr. Layton!

Now - let's hope that movie is anywhere near as good as the Michelinie/Layton Iron Mans were.

Joey Q Just Doesn't Seem To Get It

2008-01-09T17:02:00.001-08:00

An article in the January 7th New York Post reports that the next issue of Amazing Spider-Man will open with a now single Peter Parker kissing a woman who isn't Mary Jane. And here's the quote from Marvel Editor-In-Chief Joe Quesada:

"The first page is a real shocker and it's done on purpose. It's a bit of a slap of reality to longtime readers."

No - the slap of reality was the decision to have made this change in the first place. It sounds like Quesada just doesn't care what Spidey fans think. He comes off as...disrespectful. It would be nice to think that he would see his position as overseer of these great characters in a way that would preserve what made them great. That he would consider himself a respectful caretaker. But looking at Marvel's recent output, it sure doesn't seem like that is the case. Nor does it seem that any character is safe.

I didn't think that the Spider-Man folks could have exceeded the badness of the Gwen Stacy kids plot, but then Peter Parker revealed his identity. Then they upped the stakes and introduced this Mephisto "do-over" plot. Oh what a tangled web...

I can understand the strong negative reaction of Spider-Man fans - they've had to endure a good amount of questionable comics. I am glad I don't regularly read the title anymore. I will simply be left to wonder why Marvel seems bent on destroying it's greatest character...and whittling down it's considerable fanbase. I have to admit that I am somewhat curious to see where this will go. Dan Slott is the writer and I do like his work.

I am trying to be open-minded with these postings, as I don't want folks to think that I just feel like ranting about the state of the comic industry. Mostly, I enjoy comics...there are a lot of good ones coming out (even ones that JQ oversees). The goings-on in the Spider-Man titles seem like little more than a lazy way to shake up an established character. Are sales that bad? Or could it be that they've actually ran out of good ideas for the Spider-Man books?

Can Even Spider-Man Help the UN?

2008-01-06T22:14:00.000-08:00

I thought this was interesting - Marvel Comics and the United Nations will be releasing a comic book later this year to help add some luster to the UN's image. The storyline will feature Spidey and the Fantastic Four working with UN agencies in a fictional war-torn country.

The comics will be distributed free to US schoolchildren and then translated and distributed worldwide. What a great idea. It's nice to write about something that doesn't force me to take shots at Marvel for a change.

I give them about a week to revert back to form...

One More Day - Worst Ever?

2008-01-04T19:05:00.000-08:00

This is an odd case - I will be quoting myself from an earlier post:

"[J. Michael] Straczynski gets a lot of rolled eyes from me, but it should be noted that I am a long time Spider-Man fan, and I tend to judge Spidey story arcs mercilessly.

The worst transgression was the recent "Gwen Stacy's kids" story arc. I think this may be my least favorite idea ever presented in Spider-Man. And that's saying something, as Spidey also "boasts" the Clone Saga. I also thought the Morlun story was a bit irritating. Why do writers seem to like the idea of totally overmatching Spider-Man and then having somebody who'd never been seen before whale the tar out of him? This reminded me of Bane and Doomsday."

I believed this to be true. That was then. This is now. Marvel has stepped up its game, huh? This "One More Day" storyline may be my least favorite storyline (and also the worst storyline) out of all the comics I've ever seen. And I've seen plenty.

This makes "CapWolf" (snicker - Captain America 405) look like sheer brilliance. It makes "The Superia Stratagem" (something about making the world all women (?) - Caps 387-392) seem like it's worth a second look. It makes any Rob Liefeld comic seem desirable.

Let's see - here's a description I found in a New York Post article published on December 29th: "In a highly controversial move, Marvel Comics has wiped out the friendly neighborhood wall crawler's longtime marriage to Mary Jane Watson, reverting the perpetually put-upon Peter Parker to a 20-something bachelor who lives at home with his elderly Aunt May. In it, the publisher's devil character, Mephisto, offers to save the life of Peter's always ailing ancient aunt if he and Mary Jane turn their back on their love and history together."

Hmph. Mephisto. Well, we haven't seen that device before, have we? There's always a catch. And there's always some moronic out clause that saves the day and renders Mephisto's trickery moot. And the gain of the deal with Mephisto is never undone. I suppose ol' Pete and MJ will cross their fingers and rub a rabbit's foot? In your face, devil-boy!

Peter Parker will be a 20-something again? So what does that mean? Is Marvel really going to have Spider-Man go back to the beginning? Meaning he's back at ol' ESU? So he'll meet Gwen soon? And Harry Osborn? And Professor Warren?

We'll be able to thrill to the death of Captain Stacy again? And then Gwen? Then Norman Osborn? Hey, maybe Gerry Conway and Ross Andru can be the writing and art team again! Wouldn't that be great? It was great the first time around, but you can't go home again...I'd rather see "SpideyWolf" than this "One More Day" story!

What a freaking joke. I join you, legions of Spider-Man fans that absolutely hate this idea. It's easily my least favorite idea that the former "House of Ideas" has come up with in decades. The previous least favorite idea was having Spider-Man reveal his identity in the first place. The least favorite before that was putting him in the Avengers.

How come Bill Mantlo, Denny O'Neil, Roger Stern, Tom DeFalco, David Micheline, Kurt Busiek, Peter David and Roberto Aguirre-Sacasca didn't have trouble coming up with good Spider-Man comics without tearing the character apart? Please stop trying to reinvent the wheel. You've got a great character here with a rich history, a great supporting cast and endless possibilities.

More recent posts can be found on my new blog

Flash - back to 231 ?

2007-12-29T20:41:00.001-08:00

What happened? I thought that DC had rebooted Flash and made Bart Allen the newest incarnation of the Flash. There was a new number 1 issue and everything. Then I find out that Bart was murdered in the All Flash one shot??? And that the next issue after that was issue 231?? And that Mark Waid has returned as Flash scribe?

I'm all in favor of the last two items, but what's up with the murder of Bart Allen? Why is DC so bloodthirsty in recent years? Sue Dibny. Blue Beetle. Max Lord. Bart Allen.

I think what is interesting to me about this list is that these characters either saw a renaissance in the mid to late 80s (Flash, too, come to think of it - in his own book and the Justice League books) or they were introduced to the DC Universe then. It's also interesting that the first three characters were big in the aforementioned Justice League comic by the heavily underrated Keith Giffen.

It seems that DC can't undo what Giffen did fast enough. He told stories that were fun and interesting, and he took the second rate JL characters and made them an important part of the team. Who else could have made G'Nort an interesting character? But apparently, comics aren't supposed to be fun. Grim and gritty is what we all want. Right?

Flash in the Giffen JL was a fun jokester type, just like Blue Beetle and Booster Gold. And Max Lord was a somewhat benevolent guy who funded the JL and tried to make the world a safer place. Lord's fate in recent years, and the actions that were attributed to him are kinda inconsistent with the character that Giffen created. But I digress.

Flash, like Giffen's JL, was relaunched in 1987 (I think it was then...maybe 1986?), and I thought the relaunch (both, actually) was quite good. I liked the Baron/Messner-Loebs issues better than the Waid issues, but I recognize that Waid still had a solid run.

And, of course, there were the Geoff Johns issues. I discovered them late (in the 180s), but once I started getting them, I really enjoyed reading them. And I was always a bit lukewarm about my affinity for this character. It was hit or miss. But for the first 60 or so, and the last 60 or so, of the relaunched Flash - I read and enjoyed it.

I look forward to reading Waid's return to this character. He did a lot to shape the current incarnation and it will be fun to see what he has in store.

A New Captain America

2007-12-26T09:18:00.001-08:00

Well, I have to admit that I didn't see that coming. I just read that Ed Brubaker will be introducing a new person to be Captain America in January. This is probably old news to the folks who keep up with the day-to-day comic events, but it's news to me.

I really expected Marvel to just cancel the book, start over with volume 6, number 1 and act as though the assassination never occurred. Another person wearing the costume wasn't something I thought would happen.

The idea of someone else wearing the costume isn't new, but this is the first time it will be done at a time when Steve Rogers isn't around to keep an eye on things. And the idea that it could be the long-dead Bucky Barnes that will be taking over...well, I'm not sure how I feel about that.

I liked the fact that Bucky was dead long before I started reading comics. And that he stayed dead. I think that Gwen Stacy (discounting the clone) is the only other Marvel character that remained deceased. For a while, they had the decency to include Norman Osborn in this little club, but they ruined that in the 90s.

I am intrigued by this development. It's much like the return from the dead of Jason Todd in Batman. I didn't think it was a good idea, but Judd Winick wrote such good stories, I found myself reading and enjoying the Batman tales that featured this story arc. I suspect the same thing will happen here. I have enjoyed Brubaker's work as much as I've enjoyed Winick's.

I'll have to look for a trade paperback to see it though...as I doubt any of these issues will be found in a discount box!

Alternate to Spider-Man

2007-12-23T17:30:00.001-08:00

I've complained a bit in the past about how disappointed I am in the current state of Spider-Man and even identified the time frame at which I think Spidey started down the slope of my discontent.

What I didn't mention is that there were alternates to Spider-Man (Amazing, Spectacular, Web and adjective-free) that I did read and enjoy. I was bummed that I disliked the main titles so much and was glad to have these three titles to read.

The three titles were Spider-Man 2099, by Peter David, Spider-Girl by Tom DeFalco and Untold Tales of Spider-Man by Kurt Busiek.

Spider-Man 2099

2099 was a fun read by one of my favorite writers (again, I have bored whatever readers I have to death on this topic in other posts). As Gerry Conway seemed to be trying to do with Firestorm, this seemed to be Peter David's effort to have a hand in "creating" his own version of Spider-Man and adding his own personal style and touch to it.

I have no information to prove that either writer was, in fact, looking at their respective books in this fashion (i.e. in an "if I created Spider-Man, here's what I'd have done" sort of way)...but I can't deny that the thought didn't cross my mind in both cases. Just me thinking out loud here.

2099 had a great origin story, good supporting characters, interesting ideas and interesting plots. All the things you'd expect from Mr. David.

Spider-Girl

The same could be said for Spider-Girl. In addition to the great aspect of seeing Mary Jane and Peter (retired from the Spider-Man thing, but occasionally jumping in) about 20 years after the current continuity, you get the daughter who has inherited the Spider powers!

DeFalco also threw in old school characters like Kaine, J. Jonah Jameson, Felicia Hardy and Flash Thompson were featured. Also featured were ancillary characters who you didn't need too much to draw the connection - like Phil Urich (fresh off the decent, but short-lived Green Goblin series), Normie Osborn and Franklin Richards.

There were also interesting new characters galore (too many to name) populating this fun and fresh title. And Tom DeFalco (and Ron Frenz) wound it all together and made it all run beautifully.

Untold Tales of Spider-Man

Finally, there was Kurt Busiek's Untold Tales. These were stories that took place kinda "in between the lines" of the earliest days of the Amazing stories. There were always some threads that more intrepid readers could recognize and get a proper time frame for where that particular story took place in terms of the genesis of Spider-Man.

Busiek gave us some new stories with old classic villains and mixed in a dash of new tales with some cool new Spider-Man foes. As DeFalco did, Busiek spun all these tales and just told some great stories.

As a Spider-Man purist, I have to give Busiek credit. He was merely adding to the Spider-Man legend...never threatening to alter it. It could easily have been misinterpreted. But he did too good a job for that.

Speaking of which, I'd be remiss if I didn't mention Busiek's brilliant Marvels mini-series he did with Alex Ross. If you haven't read this, you're missing out. It's really really good.

Anyway, the third issue of Marvels was a "between the lines" tale that took place shortly after the death of Captain Stacy - the first of what I consider to be a few watershed moments in the Amazing title.

There is an interview with Gwen Stacy and a chilling scene with Doctor Octopus in which he acts exactly as you would expect a master villain to act. Cold. Remorseless. Excellent writing.

That's my take on this. Three excellent Spider-Man alternate titles. All came along at a good time for someone who was a lifelong Spider fan and felt alienated from the main titles.

If you are of a similar vein, look for any of these titles. They all read like the Lee/Ditko or Lee/Romita Sr. Spider-Man tales. Not a bad thing at all.

The Hulk - better or worse?

2007-12-17T19:29:00.000-08:00

Hmmm...So at least two end-of-the-year newspaper writers - one from the Contra Costa Times and the other from the Times Union (Albany, NY) have proclaimed that the recent Hulk storyline (World War Hulk, I guess) is one of the top story arcs of 2007.

I guess so. I haven't read it myself, but I am puzzled by this. Here's a description I got from the Times Union: "This started almost three years ago, when Earth's superheroes decided they had enough of the violent and powerful Hulk, so they shot him off into deep space. The Hulk liberated the world he landed on and found a way back to Earth to declare war on everyone who crossed his path in World War Hulk. Well-plotted."

I'm sure this is oversimplyfying things, but it doesn't sound all that earth-shattering to me. It also sounds a bit like the storyline that began in Hulk 300. This, of course, was preceded by the Hulk gaining Bruce Banner's intellect, only to have that slowly slip away.

Then Dr. Strange banished the Hulk to some otherworldly dimension, where he was free to roam from planet to planet until he found something he liked. Since the Hulk in these stories was totally brutish and pretty much growled the whole time, finding that happiness was not likely to happen. There was also a "fail-safe" spell that would remove Hulk from any world once he tired of it.

Bill Mantlo wrote some very good stories exploring this plot device and made it interesting. Of course, it wasn't long before the Hulk returned to Earth, was written and drawn by John Byrne for six issues and then was turned over to master craftsman Peter David.

It would take me too long to list all the great plots and character development the Hulk underwent under David's reign as Hulk scribe. Suffice it to say that I have not been bowled over by any Hulk run since David was forced off the title.

The Bruce Jones stuff was interesting, and I was glad to see David return for some issues...but in my mind, even the less compelling Peter David Hulk stories were better than other people's best efforts. But I guess nothing lasts forever. I'll just be glad to have read those Peter David Hulk tales and figure that, maybe someday, someone will give us Hulk comics that are that good.

Or, really, any comics that are that good.

Super Villain Team-Up!

2007-12-14T21:09:00.001-08:00

Because you demanded it! Well, maybe not. Amazingly, the ultra-cool 1970s Super-Villain Team-Up did not carry that tagline. But even though I did not demand it, it was great.

It all started in March 1975 with Giant-Size SVTU number 1 featuring Doctor Doom and the Sub-Mariner. Of course, it had the obligatory 70s "And Now the Iron-Masked Master of Menace Thinks Back..." line that leads to the reprint that allegedly propels the story forward.

But it was still cool. The new stuff was written by Roy Thomas and drawn by John Buscema. So far, so good, right? Issue 2 of GS SVTU, published 3 months later, had a full original story, again by Thomas, but this time the artists were Mike Sekowsky and Sam Grainger. Clearly, Marvel was a bit too ambitious with the GS part of this, as they inexplicably have a reprint of Amazing Spider-Man 8 included in this issue! Huh???

Anyway, fast forward 2 more months to SVTU number 1! Doctor Doom! Sub-Mariner! And some new characters - Attuma! Dr. Dorcas! And the Terrible Tiger Shark! This time out, we have Tony Isabella doing the writing, and George Tuska & Bill Everett doing the art chores. They even throw George Evans into the mix with the second part of the story.

And so it went. Each issue, you didn't know who would deliver the goods - but each issue was entertaining. Later issues added the Red Skull to the mix! All that was missing was the Green Goblin. Too bad he was dead (at least at the time he was).

And just look at some of the great names that lent their considerable talents to this excellent title: Sal Buscema, Jim Shooter, Bill Mantlo, Herb Trimpe, Jim Mooney, Steve Englehart and Keith Giffen.

Maybe I was just at the right age and very impressionable. Whatever it was, I can say that I still think this is one of my favorite 70s titles. It was a fun 19 issues - and what more can you ask for when it comes to comics? Fun is exactly what all comics should strive for.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Awesome! I just found out that there is an Essentials that collects all these issues and more! I may have to get this myself! You can get them all in one place! Lucky you!

Dark Knight pictures

2007-12-12T17:26:00.000-08:00

First there were the Watchmen images. Now, images for the Dark Knight movie have been released. Heath Ledger as the Joker looks pretty good. He looks menacing and crazy - exactly what the Joker should be.

Here's hoping this will move the memory of the Cesar Romero and Jack Nicholson Jokers even further into the depths of my consciousness. I'd really like to forget I ever saw either one. It's not as though either version was visually terrible. They just weren't...the Joker as I thought of the character.

I take some solace in that as bad as those Jokers were, they were visually superior in every way to what the movies did to the Green Goblin. Boy, do I wish they'd kept that simple.

They seem to be on a good path here with the upcoming Batman movie. I will be interested in seeing more images, and hopefully soon - more trailers.

Recent Batman readings

2007-12-08T18:39:00.001-08:00

Well, I guess it can't all be great....I just read the 'Grotesk' storyline in Batman, and I was a bit disappointed. It's too bad, really. John Ostrander has done some good comics in the past, but this does not show that.

I'll give him a pass because these are filler issues, after all. They follow the great Grant Morrison 'Son of Batman' storyline and then are in turn followed by some more teriffic Morrison issues. And of course, all of this follows the Judd Winick issues, which I think I've blathered on about how much Iiked them in a previous post.

I'll try to remember Ostrander on Firestorm, The Spectre and some of the other titles he did in the 80s and 90s. He deserves that.

But I do look forward to reading the newest Morrison issues, and I hope he is the regular writer for some time. It's nice to be able to say that about Batman. For a long while, up to and including the bloated and overrated 'Hush' storyline, I didn't like Batman all that much.

And please don't get me started about the little regard I have for the soulless "All-Star Batman and Robin" series.

I'm just happy to have someone of Morrison's caliber writing such a great character. And with the hype machine working overtime for the upcoming Dark Knight movie...I doubt I'm alone in this opinion.

More great comic book covers

2007-12-06T20:11:00.000-08:00

As the first post was one of the few that I've actually had comments on, I decided to see if I could find some other cool covers. See what you think:

Daredevil 146 by Gil Kane (Copyright Marvel Comics)
Marvel Team-Up 39 by John Romita, Sr. (Copyright Marvel Comics)
Detective 467 by Rich Buckler (Copyright DC Comics)

Some good ones, eh? I wonder if I'll find any to post that were published after the mid 80's? There must be some covers worthy of display. Let me know if you think of some.

Of course, there is a catch - I'll only post them if I agree! But I am an agreeable guy...

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Ask and ye shall receive! Here are a few more covers, one from a direct answer, and the others that I remembered as being similarly themed.

Thor 276 by John Buscema (Copyright Marvel Comics)
Hulk 255 by Rich Buckler (Copyright Marvel Comics)
Captain America 230 by Ron Wilson (Copyright Marvel Comics)

And still more - another suggestion and some other cool ones. I seem to be favoring Marvel in general, and Spider-Man in particular....

Superman 217 by Ed Benes (Copyright DC Comics)
Spider-Man 251 by Ed Hannigan (Copyright Marvel Comics)
Spider-Man 258 by Ron Frenz (Copyright Marvel Comics)

By the way, I am sure I am right about the artist in most cases, but if you see an error, please let me know so I can have the attributions correct.

Nostalgic for the 70s

2007-12-04T20:24:00.000-08:00

As I sell things on eBay, I come across some really cool items from the past. Recently, I sold a Draco the Dragon Spider-Man book & record. As far as I know, the story had not been published as a comic book, so the story was unique. How cool is this? It's doubly great because I get to remember how much I enjoyed it all those years ago, and the buyer told me that it reminded them of their own childhood. I'm happy to be a part of something like that.

And John Romita Sr. art on Electric Company Magazine? That rocks! Marvel and DC both used to put some cool stuff out there for the fans. I have a roll of toilet paper with panels from Spider-Man 119 and 120 on it. Gil Kane art! How could it get better?!?

I have Fun Books with word searches, mazes, crossword puzzles and games all based around the Marvel Universe. I have Spider-Man, Batman and Superman calendars, maze books, magnets, cars, games, puzzles (a Batman puzzle with Neal Adams art!) and coloring books.

And LPs! Lots of 12-inch, 33 1/3 long play records with great, cheesy and totally cool superhero stories on them! The Justice League one was always my favorite. Some of the worst songs and corniest stories you'll ever hear...but I can't help but smile to think of them! One of the songs starts like this: Metamorpho, Metamorpho....This is the story of the Element Man...You just don't get stuff like that nowadays!

Maybe I'm just not in the know and items like these things are readily available now. I know that some of this stuff is - like calendars, magnets and coloring books. But it's different compared to the 70s. Maybe it's because I was a kid and I am seeing it through nostalgic rose colored glasses. But I can't imagine what's out there now could possibly have the soul of the 70's stuff!

I'd like to see book & cds based on issues that have been published. Toilet paper with Ultimate Spider-Man panels on it. And of course, let's see Fun Books come back! Wouldn't that be cool?

Likes & Dislikes - Grant Morrison

2007-12-02T20:47:00.000-08:00

A bit of a no-brainer to make this post, eh?

Start with Animal Man 1-26 where he took a pretty ordinary character and gave us compelling stories, culminating with one of the most shocking and sad moments in comics. Then the great look at the aftermath and reaction that most people would likely have if that had happened to them. Definitely not your typical superhero fare.

Move forward several years to JLA. His handling of this super-team was second only to Keith Giffen's in the modern era. And it's not like the two are all that far apart in my mind. I just prefer the Giffen version. But Morrison again took some established, traditional, and (at the time) kinda boring characters and made them interesting and relevant again.

Then top it off with New X-Men.

If there was any comic book that I DIDN'T like, it was the X-Men. Never really read Uncanny X-Men, no interest in Ultimate X-Men. I'll politely pass on Wein/Cockrum, Claremont/Byrne, Claremont/any artist. Outside of the Stan Lee and Neal Adams issues, the X-books just didn't interest me.

And yet, there I was happily reading New X-Men and loving it. Some X-motifs were recast in new and interesting ways. Xavier walks. Scott Summers steps out - Cyclops/Jean Gray, Cyclops/White Witch. Cassandra Nova...Xavier has a sister?? And - best of all - no stupid crossovers with the other X-titles!

I knew it was good when I found out that my X-Men loving, Marvel Zombie buddy kept telling me that it wasn't the "real" X-Men. You know what? It should be the "real" X-Men! Or...perhaps not. Well - it was new and interesting to me. Maybe that explains why I was not upset by it as X-Men fans were.

Now Grant Morrison is writing Batman - and it's great! He starts with the "Son of Batman" story - a sequel to the excellent Mike W. Barr/Jerry Bingham "Son of the Demon" graphic novel (which really is a graphic novel!) - and keeps going from there. I really liked the Judd Winick run, and it remains to be seen how the Morrison run will stack up. If the past is any indication, it will stack up well indeed. He's off to a great start thus far.

Of course, I'd be remiss if I didn't mention other Grant Morrison works such as Sebastian O, Skrull Kill Krew, Invisibles, Kid Eternity, Doom Patrol, Seven Soldiers of Victory, We3, Marvel Boy, Fantastic Four: 1234, Zenith (2000AD), Aztek and All-Star Superman (which is so much better than Frank Miller's All-Star Batman, it isn't even funny).

I'm sure there are some other Morrison works I'm omitting, but this is a pretty good list. So go out and find some Morrison issues. Amazingly, you'll be able to find some in the dollar boxes. You can get some really good stuff from these boxes.

Watchmen Movie

2007-12-01T21:06:00.000-08:00

Saw some images from the upcoming Watchmen movie. Hard to know which way to go on this. What I do know for sure is that Alan Moore is against it - but that's true of any of his works. And based on some of the movies that have been based on his comics, I can't say I blame him.

On the one hand, it seems that the story has too many nuances to properly capture in a 2-hour movie. There are a lot of characters to keep track of. And a lot of history and motivations established over the course of those 12 issues. They could spend the first hour of the movie just introducing the characters.

On the other hand, it is going to be directed by Zack Snyder, who directed 300. Snyder has said (according to IMDB's trivia) that in order to be true to the source when adapting a graphic novel to the screen, the original visual art should be respected as much as the written portion."

That seems to bode well, doesn't it?

Another good thing: According to IMDB, both Tom Cruise and Jude Law expressed interest in the role of Ozymandias. And neither were selected. This is a good thing. Make that great. Looking at the cast list, it seems that it has some good names, but there doesn't look to be any one person with an overblown, Cruise-like ego to destroy the project.

So, I guess in the end, it doesn't matter what I think, because they're going to make the movie anyway. I guess I'll just have to wait and see. I'd like to be pleasantly surprised. I hope Zach Snyder can deliver that surprise for me.

It's a great story - and it would be nice to see a great film come from it.

Great Comic Book Covers

2007-11-28T20:00:00.001-08:00

I actually googled something along these lines, and the results were less than impressive. So I thought I'd take a stab at this myself. I have always had a few covers that would come to mind when this topic would come up. The main ones are Amazing Spider-Man 151, Moon Knight 29, Superman 317, Captain America 110 and Marvel Tales 63. What's interesting about Marvel Tales 63 is that it's a new cover for a reprint of Amazing 82. The cover for issue 82 was cool, but I always thought MT 63 was even better.

Amazing Spider-Man 151 by John Romita, Sr. (Copyright Marvel Comics)
Moon Knight 29 by Bill Sienkiewicz (Copyright Marvel Comics)
Superman 317 by Neal Adams (Copyright DC Comics)

Captain America 110 by Jim Steranko (Copyright Marvel Comics)
Marvel Tales 63 by John Romita, Sr. (Copyright Marvel Comics)
Amazing Spider-Man 82 by John Romita, Sr. (Copyright Marvel Comics)

Aren't they cool? Not many DC covers, I notice. That means I must be failing to remember some good ones. There must be some good ones from the Neal Adams days. Oh yeah - here are a few. And a great Hulk cover.

Detectives 402 & 404, both by Neal Adams (Copyright DC Comics)

Hulk 340 by Todd McFarlane (Copyright Marvel Comics)

I'm sure there are many more cool covers, but this is what I have so far.

D3's Review - Mister X

2007-11-27T16:50:00.000-08:00

I came across Mister X about 20 years ago at a South Jersey convention. It was a great convention, and sadly, it died a slow, painful death by the time the 90s rolled in. Another casualty of the speculators and the mega-cons.

But that's not what I'm set to be rambling about here. No - that would be a comic book series called Mister X. The first four issues were done by the brilliant Hernandez brothers - Gilbert, Mario and Jaime. Same guys who did Love & Rockets. Another title y'all should be readin' - and so should I.

I don't know why Mister X struck me the way it did. Maybe it was the clean art. Maybe it was the fun and interesting story. Maybe it was the bold, clever and dynamic artistic choices made on the covers and on the insides of the covers. The design of the book was excellent. I normally don't worry too much about the art (more story driven), but the art was sharp and - dare I say it - visionary. The overall visual style was striking from cover to cover.

Maybe not just one thing - no idea really. But it was good. The story was about the architect that designed Radiant City. He returned to "undo the damage he believes he has done...even if it kills him." This brought him into conflict with a former mob boss who was running clubs in the city. Add into it a cast of killer dames, and you've got a fun, interesting, offbeat noir tale. And you're always looking to find out more about this Radiant City.

It's an excellent comic with great characters, and like Gotham City, Radiant City is kind of a character itself. The story is a bit hard to follow, but again, it's so well done it's worth sticking with it. Even when they go about explaining things, it's confusing.

After the fourth issue, Dean Motter took over the scripting, and it was still pretty good. Still confusing, but pretty good. Even if I felt that I was never getting the full story, I was entertained. I kept reading, but the ensuing issues, while very good, never matched the quality and style of the first four issues.

Each time I reread it, I remember how much I liked Mister X the first time around. I can't say anything better than that about a comic.

Likes & Dislikes - Dave Sim

2007-11-25T08:00:00.000-08:00

Boy, this one comes with some controversy. During the 80s and early 90s, Dave Sim was one of the best comic book creators out there - one of those creators to be admired. He wrote and drew Cerebus (who was an aardvark), and it was one of the best comics out there up until its 113th issue. The rest of the run is good, but I felt that High Society and Church and State were the highlights.

Anyway, what he did is nothing short of remarkable. He wrote and drew all 300 issues of the series. Compare this to the tremendously overblown Bendis/Bagley effort of 100 issues on Ultimate Spider-Man, and you can get an idea of how I feel about the Bendis/Bagley thing. It's nice, but it's not 300 issues.

Cerebus covered lots of ground, and was always thought-provoking. The main topics were religion and politics in a fictional world set in the early 14th century. If there was a comic book trend going on at the time, you could bet that Sim would somehow humorously incorporate a parody into the storyline. Super Secret Sacred Wars is an example, as are Moon Roach and Wolverroach. There were also appearances by characters loosely based on Mick & Keith, George Harrison.

The issues gave you credit for having intelligence. His letters pages were more entertaining than some comics that were being published. His Notes From the Publisher were sometimes better than the issue that they appeared in. And during High Society and Church & State, that's saying something. You got the straight poop about the industry from someone who was actually doing the work - and was the publisher to boot. The letters pages were his opinion, and sometimes were angry and/or sarcastic - which was a refreshing change from the company line nice-nice way Marvel and DC pages. That's all pretty common now, but this is where it started.

The main knock that I can recall was that there was so much backstory, that you'd be lost if you joined Cerebus in progress. I started at around issue 78, and I managed to figure things out. Of course, this was also around the time that Sim released the High Society "telephone book" that collected issues 26-50.

I don't think enough credit can be given to Sim for the development of this form of collected volume. Now they are as common as the single issue, but back in 1986, there wasn't the plethora of trade paperbacks like there are now. After all, the mini-series had just been developed a few years earlier, as had the graphic novel. This was new ground for comic books.

The success of the High Society collected book, due largely, I feel, to the quality of the work within, led to more of these books from Sim. Church & State volumes one and two, and so on. After a while, it became obvious that a book would be released upon the completion of an arc, so rumor has it that a lot of collectors eschewed the single issue and just waited for the Cerebus books.

I have mostly the single issues, with the exception of the Cerebus book (issues 1-25) and the aforementioned High Society. I consider this series a watershed occurance in comics. A non-Marvel/non-DC effort that was every bit as good as either company's output. It was so good that luminaries such as Frank Miller and Alan Moore extolled the virtues of this comic.

More proof? Marvel threatened legal action against Sim when he featured his Wolverine parody Wolverroach on three consecutive covers, thinking that people might buy Cerebus thinking it was a Marvel product. Maybe Sim did push it a bit, but Marvel really needed to lighten up.

Then times changed, and Sim and Cerebus were no longer the relevant, highly regarded creator and comic book they once were. Bendis once disrespected Sim in one of his Powers letter columns - which is kinda ridiculous, because anyone paying attention knows that every independent publisher (and every overrated, overexposed talent publishing independent work) today pretty much owes a debt to Sim they can never repay for proving, time and again, the viability of the independent market.

To sum up, what makes Sim so special in my mind?

He published, wrote and drew 300 issues (for 25 years) of the same title for an independent publisher. And it was one of the best titles out there for at least a good chunk of its run.

He helped to pioneer the trade paperback/collected edition books that are currently all the rage.

Nothing more needs to be said. If you have the chance, get some Cerebus issues. They're more than worth your time.

Marvel doin' something right?

2007-11-23T15:50:00.001-08:00

Who'd a thunk it? If you've read the relatively few posts I have on this site (Speaking of which - is anyone actually reading them? A discussion for another time...), you have probably figured out that I don't necessarily consider Marvel to be a warm, fuzzy comic publisher. But by putting their archive of comics on their web site, they have me singing a new tune.

Here's some of what I've heard is on the site (I must admit that I have not taken the plunge):

The first 100 issues of Amazing Spider-Man by Stan Lee, Steve Ditko and John Romita, Sr.

The first 100 issues of The Fantastic Four by Stan Lee and Jack Kirby

The first 66 issues of Uncanny X-Men by Stan Lee and Jack Kirby (and others)

The first 50 issues of The Avengers by Stan and Jack and Don Heck

If they had stopped here, that would have been a great offering for $9.99 a month, or $4.99 monthly with a year-long commitment. The only changes I could see would be adding things like the first 50 issues of Daredevil, the first 100 issues of Journey Into Mystery/Thor, the first 50 issues of Captain America, the first 50 issues of Iron Man....basically, anything that Stan Lee wrote.

But they do have other offerings. Things like the first appearance of Spider-Man's black costume (Spider-Man 252 or Secret Wars 8?), Astonishing X-Men, selected titles from the Ultimate line (Spider-Man, X-Men, Fantastic Four and The Ultimates), The House of M, current issues of Amazing Spider-Man, New Avengers, Young Avengers and Runaways among others.

All of which I could do without. Most of these are pretty average issues, and they are also collected in trade paperbacks, aren't they? Enough exposure for Bendis, Whedon and Millar.

Please Marvel - save the bandwidth for the real classics. Instead of posting that stuff, why not post some of the 1970's and early 1980's comics that I remember so fondly from my younger years? Stuff like Marvel Team-Up, The Defenders, Moon Knight, Rom, Iron Fist, Doctor Strange, Super-Villain Team-Up (so cool and so short!) and Master Of Kung-Fu, just to name a few.

It would be fun to see these issues again - or even better, for the first time. It's a great thing for Marvel to enable readers to have such easy and direct access to comics. Marvel - if you want to know what you should post next, send me an email. I have lots of ideas.

Iron Man preview

2007-11-18T12:17:00.000-08:00

Just saw the Iron Man movie preview. Looks pretty good. I was not sure about Robert Downey Jr. as Tony Stark, but now I've changed my mind. A rich, substance-abusing, me-first guy? Sounds like RDJ - and Tony Stark.

I am a bit surprised at Gwyneth Paltrow as Pepper Potts. I don't think the character has any British background. And Jim Rhodes and Obidiah Stane, but no Happy Hogan? But the really good news is that based on the IMDB plot synopsis, it looks like they are sticking to the real history.

And the CGI looks great too - the flying scenes were awesome. I hope they keep using the Black Sabbath song. What could be more appropriate? Let's hope the movie is as good as the trailer. Often, the trailer captures the best of the film. It's a good start though.

An article worth reading

2007-11-14T19:39:00.001-08:00

I've groused about newspaper writers and the way that they write about comics.

I am very pleased to give credit where credit is due. Everyone who reads this should look up an article by a writer named Gavin Ford, who writes for the Star-Gazette of Elmira, New York.

This is actually a two-fer. A very well-written article by someone who either knows what he is talking about, or someone who did his research properly - and it's about an old-school writer who doesn't get nearly enough credit.

One of my friends and I have long been fans of Bill Mantlo, and I found out from a Peter David "But I Digress" column that Mantlo had suffered the accident that Ford mentions in his article.

It's a shame that Mantlo appears to be in less than great shape. But kudos to Ford for writing such a glowing article for a guy that was the linchpin of Marvel in the 70s.

Anyone who was a Spider-Man fan should be grateful Mantlo was around. He certainly contributed some of the more interesting Spidey tales. This includes the first artwork by comic legend Frank Miller (Spectactular Spider-Man 27 and 28) and the great Carrion story arc that followed these issues.

And I will certainly echo Ford in telling you that you should seek out Mantlo comics - especially his Hulk, Rom, Micronauts, Cloak and Dagger (among my favorites by Mantlo), Jack of Hearts, Rocket Raccoon and White Tiger (I think this started in Marvel Team-Up).

I will also be on the lookout for the "Mantlo: A Life in Comics" book mentioned in the article. If I hadn't been fortunate enough to see this article, I would not have known of this.

Thanks Gavin Ford. And happy birthday, Bill Mantlo!

The Return of Captain America

2007-11-13T19:50:00.000-08:00

Well, that didn't take long.

Cap is back. Even if it is just for an issue intended for the military and even if it's only by videotape. It's a good move for Marvel to do this.

It would be even better for Marvel to admit this wasn't the best of ideas to start with.

Considering that Marvel has already rebooted the Captain America comic four times, what's the harm in doing it again?

I am thinking that Marvel bringing Cap back is inevitable. The character is one of the oldest in comics, one of the most popular - and one of the most interesting, even if a lot of his writers didn't seem to know what to do with him.

I'd like to see Marvel just get it over with. You know they must be planning something big. Some silly "event" that will cross over into every Marvel title, go on for 144 parts and be written by Brian Michael Bendis, because Joe Quesada doesn't seem to know that Marvel has other writers.

Here's how I'd do it - cancel the current Cap title as soon as possible. Wait about three months, then relaunch the title.

Have Mark Waid write it (without the interference that was rumored to exist at the end of his excellent run) and someone other than John Romita Jr. drawing it. Nothing against JR Jr., but I'd rather see someone else given the shot.

Even though I've groused about cancelling and relaunching titles in past posts, I'd welcome this one. Marvel made a questionable decision here, and they need to set it right.

Comic fans deserve to have a Captain America comic book that is handled by a writer who understands what the character should mean. It should be patriotic and corny, as many of the great Cap tales have been. That's what the character is. That's what his strength is.

Bring back Cap! And do it right. His country needs him more than ever.

Likes & Dislikes - Peter David

2007-11-11T19:50:00.000-08:00

There are a few writers out there whose work I will buy based solely on the fact that they are the writer. This is true of Alan Moore, James Robinson, Keith Giffen, Christopher Priest - and Peter David.

Peter David doesn't get the respect of the writers cited as the top ten writers by Wizard (this is an interesting thing in and of itself, as Wizard originally did not have a top ten writer list), but, in my opinion, he is miles ahead of most of the names on that list.

Think about this - he wrote some of the best Spider-Man stories (this includes Amazing, Spectacular, Web Of and Spider-Man 2099) in recent years. I am still bummed that he was never made the regular writer of Amazing Spider-Man. That would have been great. He also wrote, bar none, the best Hulk stories in recent memory. Same goes for Aquaman and Supergirl.

Add to this list his great runs on Captain Marvel (both runs), Fallen Angel, SpyBoy, Star Trek, Atlantis Chronicles, X-Factor, Justice, Soulsearchers and the many miniseries he's done, and it's hard to find a bad issue.

I must admit that I wasn't wild about Sachs & Violens or Young Justice, but I'd be willing to give both a second chance now.

The thing is, David gives his readers credit. I've seen some complaints that David is too self-referential, and maybe there's some truth to this, but really - you should have been reading his work all along.

And even if you haven't been reading Peter David's work all along, do yourself a favor and give it a try. His comics read like comics should - they're funny, clever, serious when they should be - and always thought provoking.

He can do the Bendis the-entire-issue-is-conversation thing, and he can do punch-'em ups. He is able to get to the core of the characters and present them to us in a way that they were not presented before.

I've read a lot of comics in my time - and Peter David has rarely, if ever disappointed me. If you give him an open-minded chance, I doubt he'd disappoint you.

He's currently doing She-Hulk. And I think that Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man has been cancelled, but I would recommend that even though I only have about 5 or so issues. Peter David is that good that I'd recommend reading something of his that I have not even read yet.

And if its true that FNSM is cancelled, that would be just another example of the amazing shortsightedness that Marvel has shown toward the guy that is (and has been) their best writer of the past 20 years. Come to think of it, he's also one of DC's best writers of the past 20 years.

Even if Marvel, DC and Wizard won't admit it - see (read) for yourself. You might see comics in a new and better way if you do.

Stuck in the past

2007-11-10T10:45:00.000-08:00

Hmmm - I thought this would be easier, but I sometimes struggle with what to post next. I thought I had plenty of 'insights' to put on this blog.

It's harder than I thought it would be. I think that, for me, the main problem is that there is so much about the current state of comics that I don't like. So I don't know where to begin. It starts with the convoluted, interrelated, "event" story arcs, moves on to the proliferation of X and Spider-Man books and the fact that current comic book prices are just ridiculous.

I mean, if you collect X-Men books, you could wind up shelling out 45 bucks a month just for that particular genre. And then you have to consider whether or not you want to pick up some of the 5 or so titles dedicated to Batman and Superman.

From what I can gather, it looks like Marvel and DC are always trying to shake things up. In the past, they would go through these one-upsmanship exercises with secondary characters.

Now they are taking on the big guns.

The latest casualty is Spider-Man, and the 'brilliant' idea was having him reveal his identity to the world. This is such a bad idea (in a growing string of bad ideas), that I don't even know how to properly express my disdain for the whole 'concept.'

Normally, I hate it when they renumber a title and start over...but in this case, I'd consider it a favor.

I'd like to see Amazing Spider-Man cancelled and then relaunched. They could call it Amazing Spider-Man 350, and they could cast aside all of the continuity that went after issue 350, and have the first issue of this new book pick up from where the book was as of that issue.

That would mean no Ben Reilly, no Maximum Clonage, no return of the Green Goblin, no Spider-Man in the Avengers (if Stan Lee didn't think it was a good idea, why not stick with that?), no Morlun, no Gwen Stacy's kids and no Spider-Man's identity known to the world.

Of course, that might deprive us of some good Amazing Spider-Man tales, but I'll be hard pressed to figure out what happened after issue 350 that any true Spider-Man fan would want to retain.

No - it's best for Marvel to pull a 'DC' - allow the stories to deteriorate over time, cancel the book and relaunch with a new number 1 issue.

Oh wait - Marvel does this too. It's just that they realized it was a horrible idea and restored most of the books to their original numbering. Remember when they had two numbers on the covers?

But that only goes so far - in a lot of cases, they forgot to give us stories worth reading.

The stories don't need to be 'grim and gritty' or 'realistic' - I'd just like to see them be...good.

Dark Knight Returns

2007-11-07T19:54:00.000-08:00

Well, I see that there is a trailer out there for the forthcoming Dark Knight Returns movie. This is probably old news to most fans, but I don't keep up as well as I used to.

I was expecting a bit more, but I guess it's still early. I wonder how much of Frank Miller's original story will actually make it into the movie?

Heath Ledger as the Joker is an interesting choice. I like that better than Jack Nicholson - upon repeated viewings, that bit got tiresome pretty fast.

I also wonder if I'll see an influx of Batman articles in the papers concerning the transformation of the character from 60s camp to 70s grim and gritty? I also wonder if these articles will all also fail to mention that Frank Robbins did as much as Denny O'Neil to create that transformation? In fact, since Neal Adams did the art for both, maybe he is really the one we should thank.

And of course, about 75 percent of the articles will have something like "Bam! Pow! Wham!" in the headlines and article text, because - well, that never gets old, does it?

Then there's the chatter about the greatest Batman comics (see earlier post on this topic) ever, something which seems to happen around the time of any movie release, but moreso when it concerns Batman.

Oh well - bring it on. I look forward to what will be written by folks who only pay attention when there is a movie coming out.

I guess I should also actually get the DVD and watch Batman Begins, shouldn't I?

D3 & eBay: Selling comics

2007-11-02T20:00:00.000-07:00

Ah, eBay...As a collector, it pained me to think of selling my comics. But now that I am doing it, I have found that it is not as bad as I thought it would be.

There are some benefits to it - I get a little bit of money from it, I gain some space (although my patient and tolerant wife might not even notice) and someone else gets to enjoy some great comics.

And an added bonus is that I get to look at the issues again as they are prepped to be listed. In some cases, they haven't been touched by me in years, so it's nice to see them again. I often find myself rereading them one last time before they are shipped to a lucky buyer.

At first, I was just selling doubles and/or issues I didn't want. But now I am selling some of the good Silver Age stuff. I've already sold off the bulk of my Spider-Man issues (Amazing 51-125 are gone now) and my Fantastic Four issues (51-100 are gone).

I have also sold off some rare issues that seemed like a good idea to sell at the time. I sold my Sin City issues, my 300 issues and Venom-related Spider-Man issues, all coinciding with whatever movie was in the theaters at the time.

If you are on the lookout for new comics - not necessarily chronologically new comics, but new comics to check out - I hope you'll visit my eBay page. I am always listing stuff (more Silver Age issues coming to my eBay page), and you never know what might appear there.

I'd also appreciate any feedback you might have. I'd like to sell more stuff, and I think an outside view and outside opinions would be welcome. And if you do visit, and you wind up buying something, please let me know. I might be in the mood to discount the shipping cost.... Even if you visit and decide to pass on purchasing, any comments you feel compelled to pass along would be appreciated.

I will try to avoid shilling the eBay page here and stick to commenting on comics in general.

Graphic Novel or Comic Book?

2007-10-31T18:29:00.000-07:00

OK - so maybe it's just me. It usually is. But it's a big pet peeve of mine to see people writing about comic books and refusing to refer to them as such. It happens a lot in newspapers.

Amazingly, there are some papers that have recurring "comic of the week" type articles. A lot different from the 80s & 90s where it was a rare occurance indeed to see any articles about comics.

Now, they're a bit more prominent. And a lot of them will go to great lengths to tell you the difference between a graphic novel and a comic book. Or they'll simply make the distinction with no reality-based qualifier.

For example, this from the October 26th newspaper "The Independent" : "If it wasn"t for Watchmen, I would have missed out on other great graphic novel writers like Garth Ennis, Ed Brubaker and Frank Miller."

Look, I think it's nice that people will condescend to consider comics a viable topic for a newspaper article....but please - Last I checked, Ennis, Brubaker and Miller are all comic book writers - not "graphic novel writers"...whatever that means.

Even Sony Pictures is doing it - a promo site for "30 Days Of Night" says "Based on the Graphic Novel." Well, it's sort of accurate - but the graphic novel is "based on" the comic book mini-series that it reprints.

So let's see - what is the difference between a comic book and a graphic novel?

Here's the New York Sun attempting to clarify: "It's been decades since comic books outgrew the simple dichotomy of good and evil forces facing off in a superpowerful universe, but it's taken many of us a while to realize it. In recent years, the scope of the graphic novel has grown to cover subjects ranging from the holocaust to epilepsy and rape. On Friday, the closing night feature at the 45th New York Film Festival proves how far so-called "comic books" have traveled."

Note the use of "comic books" in the first sentence in a fairly condescending tone. Then in comes "graphic novel" in the second sentence, letting all readers know that you are not brain dead if you read pages that have words & pictures together.

They cover subjects ranging from "the holocaust to epilepsy and rape" ??? Oh wow! You mean that they are a legitimate form of entertainment? Why is this part of the sentence necessary? Why is it a shock that comic books (sorry, graphic novels) would contain themes and ideas that might cause a person to think?

Oh, it's because "the 45th New York Film Festival proves how far so-called "comic books" have traveled."

Note how "comic books" is in quotes. That's how it was in the article (it was published on October 11th if you want to look it up). In quotes. As though this is a euphemism for something. You know, "comic books" - insert air quotes here.

Here's more from the article: But Chris Staros, a publisher at Top Shelf Productions, said the medium wasn't ready to capitalize on the interest at that point. "Back in 1986 when ‘Watchmen' and ‘The Dark Night Returns' and ‘Maus' came out, comic books got a lot of notoriety," Mr. Staros said. "But there wasn't the fuel to add to the fire at that point." Today, he said, "I don't have to explain what a graphic novel is anymore."

Apparently you do, because Watchmen and Dark Knight were both printed as comic books and collected into a reprint volume. They are comic books, not graphic novels.

I suppose if I were to actually legitimize this idiotic attempt to differentiate between the two things, I'd say that a graphic novel is an original piece of work that was not originally published in serialized comic book installments.

Arkham Asylum would be an example. As would Elektra Lives. Despite what Sony Picutres thinks, 30 Days of Night is not a graphic novel. You've probably already figured out that Watchmen and Dark Knight are not graphic novels either. They are, simply, great comic books.

But then, so are a lot of "graphic novels."

The New Universe and Jim Shooter

2007-10-30T16:51:00.000-07:00

Someone was telling me the other day that they were going to be getting Warren Ellis' New Universal from Amazon. I naturally asked if I could borrow it when they had finished reading it. After all, Ellis has written some great comics and I am interested in anything he'd have written. (See earlier entry detailing my writer-driven philosophy).

I had heard about NU a while back and read a few articles about it. Too many articles went on and on about how bad Marvel's original New Universe was. It wasn't all that bad.

After all, how bad could it have been? It featured Star Brand by Jim Shooter and John Romita Jr. Few will argue that notion that JR Jr. is one of the top artists in comics. But people seem to routinely slam Mr. Shooter. This is not only unfair, it's revisionist history.

Let's see, I'll recount some of the terrible comics that Shooter wrote. The Avengers in the 160's and 170's - anyone remember the Korvac saga?.

Daredevil in the 130's, 140's and 150's. Anyone remember the great DD/Bullseye battle in 146 with the fantastic Gil Kane art? And the great issues with the Paladin that led to the issues where Maxwell Glenn committed suicide because of wrongdoings he committed while under the control of the Purple Man?

Yes, the Purple Man - the same character that Bendis used in Alias.

And Star Brand. Lest anyone miss the point here, these issues are excellent and should be part of any DD or Avenger fan's collection.

Shooter also oversaw an era of Marvel Comics as EIC that generated some of the best comics ever. Think Chris Claremont & John Byrne X-Men, Roger Stern & John Romita Jr. Amazing Spider-Man, Frank Miller Daredevil...the list goes on.

So maybe it's time to give the man some credit.

After all, he was the guy behind New Universe....which seems to be the thing that the many critics hit him with.

So, let's see...in addition to Shooter & Romita Jr. on Star Brand, we had Peter David writing Justice. That's right, Peter David writing Justice. And it was great. He also wrote a couple of issues of something called Merc or something like that. While I can't remember the exact title, I remember it was good.

A lot of New Universe wasn't all that spectacular. But it wasn't a total loss. And if you find some issues of Star Brand or Justice in the 50 cent boxes, grab a few. They're really good.

And so was Mr. Shooter.

Likes & Dislikes - the Likes, part 1

2007-10-25T19:04:00.000-07:00

In an earlier entry I took shots at a few writers. In the interest of being objective, here is an honest entry to praise work by those slighted writers. In truth, the dislike stated in that earlier entry is pretty much reserved for the ideas and arcs mentioned there.

As I mentioned, I liked Brian Michael Bendis' take on Daredevil. I was relieved when he took over, because I did not care for the Kevin Smith or David Mack issues. The Bob Gale issues were okay, but it was obvious when Bendis took over that they (Marvel) were just killing time.

Bendis handled the supporting cast in a great way. It was about time that Foggy Nelson got the credit for being the great character he always was. Frank Miller touched on it during his too-short tenure, but Bendis really brought him to life. It was also nice to see Ben Urich used as a significant player in this series. Whether or not the Luke Cage/Iron Fist/Jessica Jones thing is going to be worthwhile in the years to come is debatable. For now, they are valid characters, pretty much singly because BMB wants them to be.

Speaking of Jessica Jones reminds me how much I enjoyed Alias. That was a pleasant surprise, as I pretty much fished all the issues I have out of the dollar boxes. An excellent read, and one of the most interesting portrayals of Captain America I've read in recent years.

And, of course, how could I talk about Bendis without mentioning Jinx and Powers? Jinx was something I came across at the recommendation of a guy who ran a shop I frequented in the early 90s. I was looking for something new and interesting (and if you remember the comics landscape in the early 90s....it was kinda slim pickings).

Jinx was published by Caliber Comics and wasn't one of those "must have" titles. But I got it on this recommendation. And I liked it. Excellent noir reading. Pick it up if you haven't already - especially if you are a Bendis fan. Powers was a lot of fun and presented some interesting ideas about superheroes in general. If you're interested in a sort of deconstruction of superheroes, this is worth your time.

Now on to Greg Rucka. I had no interest in collecting Detective Comics at the time - but I found five consecutive issues at the 3 for $1.75 store. So I took a chance. The art was interesting, and the stories looked intriguing. Little did I know that Detective would soon become a "must have" title for me. It still ticks me off that I can't find issue 756 for a decent price. The run was excellent up until the "Bruce Wayne Murderer" arc. It was good after that, but I liked it a lot more before that.

The idea of giving Bruce Wayne a bodyguard was hilarious. Rucka played that hand wonderfully. And it is doubly interesting that the character of Sasha Bordeaux went on to become a larger player in the DC Universe. Rucka was another writer - like Bendis - who used his character's supporting characters brilliantly. His stories made Crispus Allen and Renee Montoya such great characters that you'd think they'd been there all along.

Rucka was also excellent on Gotham Central, a series he shared with Ed Brubaker. It featured a Gotham where Batman was a warily regarded peripheral player, and it focused on the cops who disliked his "interference" in solving crimes.

It is an interesting perspective, as Batman has become such a well-defined character that you don't usually think about how he might be perceived by the cops he sometimes works alongside. The series (what I read of it...about 25 issues) was excellent, and recommended highly.

I hope to complete my collection and read the remainder someday soon. As you probably guessed, I also totally recommend Rucka's Detective issues to anyone who enjoys good comics.

Enter the dollar boxes

2007-10-23T19:50:00.000-07:00

I've been collecting (there's that word again) for a long time. Before there was a such thing as a "pull list" and before it was standard practice for stores to set aside the issues you wanted on a weekly basis.

I had taken advantage of this service with two stores (Galaxy Books and El Dorado), and both times, I could not have been happier. They both took into account my writer-driven mania and rarely, if ever, failed to pull books by writers I wanted. This was especially good when my preferred writers would show up in titles I didn't normally get.

After a while, I stopped getting the weekly comic fix for a number of reasons. The main reason was cost - I determined that I didn't want to pay what was becoming higher and higher prices for comic books. I think it was $2.25 or $1.99 per issue at the time.

Anyway, this changed things for me. It was easy to let the shop do all the work. I'd walk in, get my stack, sort it, put back what I didn't want and pay for the rest. Easy.

Then after my epiphany (?), I had to figure out how I would still get comics without the weekly service.

Enter the dollar boxes.

At first, it was just a convention thing. All it took was for me to resist buying new comics when they first came out. I reasoned that after the books were a month or two old, they served no purpose to the shop owners, so they might turn up in dollar boxes at shows.

To a degree, this philosophy worked. I did manage to get some good comics this way. But it sure was/is a spotty way to do it.

But it did bring me back to one of the interesting aspects of collecting comics. The hunt.

Before the shops, there was Clover. Or K-Mart. Or the corner drug store. If the spinner rack didn't have the issue I wanted, there wasn't another option. Had I been able to see the future, I wouldn't have given it a second thought...but as a kid, I would get upset that I couldn't find that issue that I needed. I just wanted to find out how the story ended!

Recently, I have found a few shops that have adopted the dollar box idea, and that's great. South Jersey seems to have a real thriving comic book community. I wonder if other regions have so many good options. There are lot of good places to buy comics here.

My two personal favorites offer great prices, and often, a good selection. One boasts comics for a quarter - many times, it's pretty slim pickings, but sometimes you can find some gems. The other offers comics at 3 for $1.75. They have a very good selection, and if you are a DC fan, it's hard to beat them.

Even though this way of collecting (that word again - I guess I was wrong about "accumulating") leaves holes to fill...it's kind of refreshing to get comics now. I don't feel like I'm getting ripped off - and that's a great thing.

If I paid full price, I'd get 3 comics for $10. On a good day, I can get 40 comics for $10. I think the odds are with you if you can get 13 times the comics with your money.

Collecting...or accumulating?

2007-10-21T18:06:00.000-07:00

In an earlier post, I referred to the ownership of comics as "collecting." I'm not sure if "collecting" is the right word. It seems that "accumulating" would be more accurate.

It happened so innocently. My friends and I would go to a comic convention. I'm talking about a time before Wizard Con - when local conventions would have a good number of tables and dealers and you could really find that for which you were looking. It was sad to see these local conventions die such a slow death. But, again, I am getting off topic...

Collecting vs. Accumulating. Here's how it works: You go to a show, and find a dealer or two who've been there and not had many buyers. So they offer their books for 50 cents, 25 cents...10 cents (!) each.

Then you can really go nuts and buy all sorts of things you'd thought of trying, but didn't bother with at full price. I mean, really, how can you go wrong if you pay a quarter or a dime for an issue?

Another way to accumulate lots of issues is to frequent shops that were going out of business. This was happening quite a bit in the early/mid 90's, so my friends and I were fortunate to be able to get a crapload of comics for very reduced rates.

The end result of this is that you accumulate lots of comics. Acquiring them this way doesn't seem like collecting, does it?

This is by no means me complaining. I always enjoy getting new comics - it reminds me of simpler times when there were less things to worry about.

Of course, accumulating comics in such volume puts me in an interesting position. I now have a lot of comics that I have not had a chance to read yet. And I do get the occasional stack of comics even now, so the collection increases.

But this is a fun problem to have. I guess if I live long enough, I'll find the time to read all the "accumulated" issues.

I guess "Comic Accumulation" doesn't sound as good as "Comic Collection," does it?

Lending/Borrowing

2007-10-21T17:39:00.000-07:00

From time to time, I have lent comics to people, thereby inflicting my opinion of what is worth reading on another reader. This is all well and good, as the borrowers were previously readers of comic books and didn't necessarily have to agree with my tastes. I just picked out issues that I thought were worth a second look...or worth a look by someone other than me.

I think this is a great thing. People lend books all the time...why not comics? I've collected comics for years, and been friends with people who collected as well, but the idea of borrowing or lending with my friends never really came up before.

Sure, we would lend/borrow the occasional issues, but for the most part, we would pretty much read our own issues.

If anything, it was me who was doing the lending, as I seemed to have more comics than my friends. Hardly something to boast about, I know. But I was always something of a completist. I'd want to have all the issues before I'd commit to reading a particular run. But that's getting a bit off topic...

Perhaps this lack of lending/borrowing was because we collected the same titles. Or because we didn't overlap all that much...and wouldn't have wanted to read the books we didn't collect.

I know for my part, if someone would tell me about something that was interesting, I would usually just go out and buy it.

With comics being $3 a pop now, that certainly has changed. It's a shame - at that price, one is not as free as one once was to try new titles.

It's too bad that I don't have as close a contact with the fellow collectors I grew up with. I think I'd be more open to borrowing/lending now. I do have someone now that I've borrowed a few things from, but it's kind of few and far between.

Of course, I don't really have the time to read the comics that I've accumulated and haven't had time to read. But if there was something interesting out there that I thought I might want to read, and someone was willing to lend...I'd borrow.

Cancelled Titles

2007-10-20T06:08:00.000-07:00

I've had a history of reading titles that would get cancelled. I lament the untimely ends of such books as Aztek, Book of Fate, Xero, Resurrection Man and Quantum and Woody.

And then there was the ongoing saga with Spider-Girl, Black Panther (by Chris Priest) and Captain Marvel. For whatever reason, these three awesome books were just not selling. You'd see ads in Marvel's comics for Captain Marvel that would say something like "the best comic you're not reading."

It was a shame - I knew that all three titles were destined to be cancelled. I'm not going to say that I knew this because I was a fan of them, but it sure seemed that way.

I think that the writers don't get the respect that they deserve.

Peter David was the Captain Marvel writer, and since he left the Hulk (a brilliant take on that character - and a long one, happily), he has taken on other, interesting, and largely ignored comic titles such as Aquaman and Supergirl. Both of which were excellent, even though I had trouble even convincing my friends that this was the case.

Chris Priest's Black Panther was a breath of fresh air. It was clever, interesting and added a layer of depth to a character that was little more than a secondary character in the Marvel Universe. Interesting that he is now a larger part of the Marvel Universe, after Priest's run was concluded. You'd be hard pressed to find people willing to admit it, but it seems clear to me that Priest's take on BP was good enough to make him a viable character - and one worthy of Marvel's current plans.

Tom DeFalco wrote Spider-Girl - and before that (from around issues 251-286), The Amazing Spider-Man. I didn't care for much else that he wrote, but I really enjoyed his work on Spider-releated titles. And this was no exception. It was everything that the Spider-Man titles weren't - it was fun, clever and interesting. It didn't take itself so seriously and wasn't all about how Peter Parker's marriage had failed, and how Peter never has any money or a good job. It was just about Peter and Mary Jane's daughter inheriting the Spider abilities, and her efforts to do good. And be coached by Spider-Man. Sounds good, doesn't it?

If you see these issues in the dollar/50 cent bins, pick 'em up. They're all excellent reads and don't require tons of backstory to keep up.

Likes & Dislikes - the Dislikes

2007-10-19T18:23:00.000-07:00

I am writer driven when it comes to choosing comics. Most people seem to be artist driven or character driven. Not me. I don't care who the character is - if Alan Moore, Keith Giffen, Warren Ellis, Christopher Preist, Grant Morrison, Judd Winick, Garth Ennis and especially Peter David or James Robinson wrote it, I would be interested in reading it.

Other writers whose work I enjoyed include Frank Miller, Dave Sim and Neil Gaiman. These guys are great, but they either don't do comics anymore (Sim) or they are somewhat infrequent with their output (Gaiman and Miller). I'll usually give them a chance, but the first list of writers are definitely my first choices. I should mention here that a lot of the work that these three creators have done is among my all-time favorite works.

There are some other writers who've done work I've enjoyed, but I can't bring myself to be a totally committed fan of their work because my reaction to their work is unpredicatable at best. Sometimes I like it...sometimes I don't.

The list of dislikes would include Brian Michael Bendis, Greg Rucka, J. Michael Straczynski and Brad Meltzer. I like some of their work, but a lot of it leaves me cold. I am not a fan of revamping or "modernizing" all the classic characters. In my mind, there was nothing wrong with them that couldn't have been fixed without renumbering a series or killing a secondary character.

Recent runs that didn't grab me:

Ultimate Spider-Man. I felt the actual history was fine as it was. In general, I do wish all Spider-Man writers would do more with that great supporting cast.

I really liked BMB's Daredevil run! But I didn't like his handling of Richard Fisk...I thought the character deserved better - he was the Schemer and the Rose after all. And another "Matt Murdock is Daredevil"? That was done before wasn't it? It was handled pretty well though. Oh yeah, Powers was pretty good as well.

The end of Rucka's run on Wonder Woman - especially the Max Lord murder. Then, after painting the character into a corner....a new number 1 issue! Must have been the plan all along.

For my tastes, I liked Mr. Rucka's excellent Detective run, and WW before the "Sacrifice" storyline. On the strength of his Detective Comics issues, I'll usually give his works a chance.

Straczynski gets a lot of rolled eyes from me, but it should be noted that I am a long time Spider-Man fan, and I tend to judge Spidey story arcs mercilessly.

The worst transgression was the recent "Gwen Stacy's kids" story arc. I think this may be my least favorite idea ever presented in Spider-Man. And that's saying something, as Spidey also "boasts" the Clone Saga. I also thought the Morlun story was a bit irritating. Why do writers seem to like the idea of totally overmatching Spider-Man and then having somebody who'd never been seen before whale the tar out of him? This reminded me of Bane and Doomsday.

Identity Crisis

Just didn't like it. The death was senseless (I agree with Alex Ross, who complained about this series in an issue of Wizard) and the story unnecessary. So the heroes are just as bad as the villains. Thanks for putting that on the table. I just felt that the events that "led" up to the events of IC were inconsistent with the characters involved. I don't really know all that much about Meltzer's later work, as IC has, thus far, prevented me from being interested in checking it out. Very insular of me, I know, but IC just really rubbed me the wrong way.

First Appearance

2007-10-19T16:06:00.000-07:00

There are some topics related to comics that come up around the time a comic-based movie is about to be released. For example, one of the topics that caught my eye was repeated discussions (mostly in newspapers) about what is the greatest Batman story ever told.

The answers provided by the writers were often uninspired to say the least. Let's see...here are the usual suspects:

Arkham Asylum
Dark Knight
Year One
Killing Joke
The Long Halloween
Hush

Not to disrespect any of these choices, but they are pretty predictable. I am curious what the long time, dedicated Batman fans think. Of course, these were all watershed stories in the history of the Gotham Guardian

But I'd like to see a list where these choices are strictly forbidden to be on the list. Treat them as a given. Like when any radio station does a "Top Albums of All Time" - just count the Beatles as one entity and exclude them from the Top Ten. Give some other entrants a chance

For my list, it can be a single issue, or an arc found in Detective, Batman, Legends of the Dark Knight or Gotham Knights. It can be a JLA story, or a guest appearance in Superman. It could be a Batman appearance in any title you can think of

Something like this:

Batman 232, 242-244 (Ra's Al Ghul, by Denny O'Neil & Neal Adams)
Detective 469-476 inclusive (Steve Englehart & Marshall Rogers)
Batman & The Outsiders 1-32 (Mike W. Barr & Jim Aparo)
Detective 743-764 (Greg Rucka & Shawn Martinbrough)
Detective 400 & 402 (Classic Man-Bat by Frank Robbins & Neal Adams)

I appreciate how challenging this can be. I did this quickly, so I am sure I made a few mistakes in creators and numbers, but it was fun to think of these fine story arcs

I should also point out that if I did this again next week, you might see five completely different entries here.

Anybody else got a list?