Three 6/22 Books That I Read So That You Did Not Have To
Same as always...I tell you about three comics that I did not hear a lot about this week, and then I ask you all to fill me in on comics that I did not read this week.
Spoilers ahead!!
Ultimate X-Men #60
So the basic gist of this issue is that Deathstrike tries to terminate Ororo and Logan for Dr. Cornelius.
She doesn't.
Not the deepest of plots...hehe.
What I really want to discuss, though, is the bass-ackwards approach towards continuity in Marvel titles, but this title in particular.
Marvel wants this book to be totally approachable, with no previous knowledge of continuity necessary, and to help aid this, there are no captions (and certainly no footnotes).
Well, I happen to think any sort of "you can't do THIS with the story" type of proclamation is usually a bad idea, but it is even WORSE in this instance.
Why?
Because Vaughan is writing a book where knowledge of previous continuity is not just useful, it is almost absolutely neccesary!!
Major parts of this issue tie in to what Mark Millar had happen in his SECOND arc on this title (in other words, about FIFTY issues ago!), and other big parts tie in to events from fifteen issues ago, during Bendis' run.
You can't tell such a continuity-derived story and then put the book together in such a way that you do not give any aid to the reader!!!
If you don't want to use footnotes, then don't write stuff that needs it!
And if you want to write stuff that needs it, use footnotes!!
On another tangent, Stuart Immonen's art (inked by Wade Von Grawbadger) is really great on this comic, except for his Wolverine...which is kinda weird. How do you rock on everything, but make Wolverine look ridiculous?
Not recommended.
Year One Batman Scarecrow #2
About ten years ago, DC had a nifty (I thought) idea for their Annuals.
Each Annual was a "Year One" story.
For the characters who already HAD Year Ones (Batman and Superman), they did two different takes. On Batman, they did Year Ones for the villains, while in Superman they showed Superman's first meetings with ____ (New Gods, magic, other superheroes).
Well, Louise Simonson and John Paul Leon got together to tell the story of Superman's first meeting with other heroes, and what they basically did was just retell most of Byrne's Man of Steel (as the Batman team-up from Man of Steel #3 was highlighted, as well as the scene where Superman learns he is Kryptonian).
It is a well-told story, but at the end of the day, it is a good writer and a very good artist just telling us a story we have seen already.
Well, that is what Bruce Jones and Sean Murphy give us with Year One Batman Scarecrow #2.
It is a well-written story, with very good art by Sean Murphy (especially his Screcrow costume design) - but it really not all that different from every other Scarecrow story.
Sure, Jones attempts to add a little more depth to Scarecrow, but really, it falls a bit flat (partially because the character is so "what you see is what you get," character-wise.
Not Recommended.
Conan #17
Dave Stewart really is amazing.
It really does not matter WHAT shape Cary Nord gives him the pencils in, Stewart makes them look good with his digital coloring.
If Nord were ever truly ON this book (rather than rushing to get the book out), then this book would just be astonishing art-wise, as it looks great with Nord's rushed pencils getting the great treatment by Stewart (by the by, it was nice to see Scott basically admit in the letters columns what a lot of us thought, that Nord was rushing his pencils).
This story is a simple tale of Conan learning the ins and outs of the thieving business, with the subtle approach Conan is famous for...hehe.
Another strong issue.
Recommended!
Now on to the books that I did not read, so I was hoping you might have read them and could tell me what I missed out on -
Man With the Screaming Brain #2
Savage Dragon God War #3
Doc Frankenstein #3
Shaolin Cowboy #3
Judo Girl #2
Thanks!
Spoilers ahead!!
Ultimate X-Men #60
So the basic gist of this issue is that Deathstrike tries to terminate Ororo and Logan for Dr. Cornelius.
She doesn't.
Not the deepest of plots...hehe.
What I really want to discuss, though, is the bass-ackwards approach towards continuity in Marvel titles, but this title in particular.
Marvel wants this book to be totally approachable, with no previous knowledge of continuity necessary, and to help aid this, there are no captions (and certainly no footnotes).
Well, I happen to think any sort of "you can't do THIS with the story" type of proclamation is usually a bad idea, but it is even WORSE in this instance.
Why?
Because Vaughan is writing a book where knowledge of previous continuity is not just useful, it is almost absolutely neccesary!!
Major parts of this issue tie in to what Mark Millar had happen in his SECOND arc on this title (in other words, about FIFTY issues ago!), and other big parts tie in to events from fifteen issues ago, during Bendis' run.
You can't tell such a continuity-derived story and then put the book together in such a way that you do not give any aid to the reader!!!
If you don't want to use footnotes, then don't write stuff that needs it!
And if you want to write stuff that needs it, use footnotes!!
On another tangent, Stuart Immonen's art (inked by Wade Von Grawbadger) is really great on this comic, except for his Wolverine...which is kinda weird. How do you rock on everything, but make Wolverine look ridiculous?
Not recommended.
Year One Batman Scarecrow #2
About ten years ago, DC had a nifty (I thought) idea for their Annuals.
Each Annual was a "Year One" story.
For the characters who already HAD Year Ones (Batman and Superman), they did two different takes. On Batman, they did Year Ones for the villains, while in Superman they showed Superman's first meetings with ____ (New Gods, magic, other superheroes).
Well, Louise Simonson and John Paul Leon got together to tell the story of Superman's first meeting with other heroes, and what they basically did was just retell most of Byrne's Man of Steel (as the Batman team-up from Man of Steel #3 was highlighted, as well as the scene where Superman learns he is Kryptonian).
It is a well-told story, but at the end of the day, it is a good writer and a very good artist just telling us a story we have seen already.
Well, that is what Bruce Jones and Sean Murphy give us with Year One Batman Scarecrow #2.
It is a well-written story, with very good art by Sean Murphy (especially his Screcrow costume design) - but it really not all that different from every other Scarecrow story.
Sure, Jones attempts to add a little more depth to Scarecrow, but really, it falls a bit flat (partially because the character is so "what you see is what you get," character-wise.
Not Recommended.
Conan #17
Dave Stewart really is amazing.
It really does not matter WHAT shape Cary Nord gives him the pencils in, Stewart makes them look good with his digital coloring.
If Nord were ever truly ON this book (rather than rushing to get the book out), then this book would just be astonishing art-wise, as it looks great with Nord's rushed pencils getting the great treatment by Stewart (by the by, it was nice to see Scott basically admit in the letters columns what a lot of us thought, that Nord was rushing his pencils).
This story is a simple tale of Conan learning the ins and outs of the thieving business, with the subtle approach Conan is famous for...hehe.
Another strong issue.
Recommended!
Now on to the books that I did not read, so I was hoping you might have read them and could tell me what I missed out on -
Man With the Screaming Brain #2
Savage Dragon God War #3
Doc Frankenstein #3
Shaolin Cowboy #3
Judo Girl #2
Thanks!
posted by Brian Cronin at 6/26/2005 04:01:00 PM
5 Comments:
Since you mentioned the 'Year One' annuals, how does the Scarecrow mini stack up against the Scarecrow Year One Annual from that event?
I haven't read either, but I can see that this new 'Year One' story cost three times as much as the old one.
"I didn't read Bendis' issues of the X-men and I don't think I read the Millar issues you're talking about and I had no trouble following the story.
I think it was pretty easy ot infer what happened through the dialogue."
It must be your Coluan-level intellect.
Good question, Loren.
I believe this year's version outshined the Doug Moench/Bret Blevins version from the 1995 Batman Annual.
I DO think Moench had a decent story arc in Batman that spun out of the Annual, but the Annual itself was no great shakes.
This story is better than that, but, as you say, it took two issues and much more money...hehe.
Thanks so very much for taking your time to create your blog. Excellent work
jordan retro
air max 90
jordan 13
fitflops sale clearance
patriots jerseys
birkin bag
nmd
derrick rose shoes
nike lebron 15
longchamp handbags
Post a Comment
<< Home