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.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I just started reading Y The Last Man a couple months ago and it's an offbeat but interesting story. It's odd and quirky and the story takes these random twists and turns at times but it's generally satisfying and I like odd and quirky anyway.
Your question about why bother reading a comic that has ended is the reverse of what I would have expected. It's all the more attractive knowing there is a conclusion. If you read a trade of, let's say, Amazing Spider-man you might get a complete story arc but you know you'll probably never read the complete series as it will likely continue after we're long dead.
I like the idea of ending a series if the original creators want to end it and there is a sense of completeness when it's over. However, if this happened all the time we'd never have seen great runs like Frank Miller's Daredevil, Alan Moore's Swamp Thing, Walt Simonson's Thor, Peter David's Hulk, etc. There's something really cool when a new creative team can bring new life to an old comic, especially favorites that had started to sag a little.
Anyway, I'm on book 7 of Y and even from the first book it gave me the feeling this was a story with a clear end. I'm looking forward to seeing what happens then. I'm sure it will be unexpected but worth the journey.
I'm surprised that you interpreted this article to read that I was not in favor of comic series that have a finite ending. I am very much a fan of this - and grateful that Starman, Sandman, Shade and Peter David's Supergirl all had final issues and no other writers.
In fact, I mentioned something to this effect in the article:
"...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."
I totally agree with you on Frank Miller's Daredevil, Alan Moore's Swamp Thing, Walt Simonson's Thor, Peter David's Hulk and the like that there is also room for writers to come in after the original creative team.
It's very subjective, but I think it's a situation where you just know which titles should stop when the writer is done and which titles can/should go on.
Post a Comment