Planetes, Book 1 - Men At Work

Yes, a Charlie Sheen/Emilio Estevez reference in the thread title!

Who could ask for anything more?!?!

In any event, Planetes, Book 1 by Makoto Yukimura, is, like the Estevez/Sheen film, about a group of garbage collectors.

Only this book (today's "You Decide", as chosen by Brad Curran) is about garbage collectors in SPACE!

takes a very interesting approach to the world of the future, as Yukimura knows that just like how the world of the sea includes not only cruise ships, travel vessels, fighting vessels, aircraft carriers and submarines, but also tug boats and garbage barges; then so does the world of space include crafts like the one in Planetes that just goes around collecting space debris.

However, while the frank look at what outer space life would actually be like is interesting, if it was just an examination of outer space life, then it would not be that good as, well, let's be honest, it would just be an essay on "what outer space would be like in the future." And that, while perhaps interesting to people who are really really really interested in "what outer space would be like in the future," can get boring to people who are as much into that stuff.

Luckily, Planetes revolves around a very interesting cast of characters that really make the comic work. In fact, as much time as Yukimura devotes to the realistic science, he devotes JUST as much time to developing the characters.

Planetes is not a "graphic novel," it is a clear collection of short stories that tell an advancing plot. The characters are Hachimaki, a young astronaut who dreams of being a famous explorer, Yuri, a Russian with a sad past, and Fee, a wife and mother who is gruff, yet she cares about her crewmates.

The stories are basically slice of life stuff, although there is one chapter that gets pretty action-packed, as some world-saving is involved...hehe.

The art is great, but mainly you'll find yourself drawn into these people's world by the rich characters and in-dept characterizations, and you will want to read more and more about these characters.

The stories mix in humor and action and drama quite nicely.

Only one real complaint about the series. At one point, with no explanation, Yukimura switches Yuri and Hachimaki's hair color!! It is soooo weird. Just, out of nowhere, the blonde one is now dark-haired and the dark-haired one is now blonde. Soooo strange.

Still, heavily recommended!

Gender politics in comics; or, will chicks like Filler?

I wasn't privileged enough to receive an advance copy of AiT/Planet Lar's publication Filler like these people were), and that makes me sad (not really, but I had you going there for a minute, didn't I?). It's worth the money, however, and continues the company's good track record. So go buy it! I'd like to look at it in two ways - one as a simple review, and then as whether it is a statement on gender roles and misogyny in comics. Bear with me!

Unlike others, I will not be comparing this book to Sin City. Oh sure, the comparison is there, but the people above have done it, so I won't. I will say that I really liked this book, despite the contention (again, by some of the people above) that it never rises above a simple crime fable. So what, and, really? It is well constructed, well written, well drawn (it's not perfectly drawn, but it's nice and rough and fits the story), and has enough twists to keep everything moving. I actually wasn't reminded of Sin City, I was reminded of Goldfish and Jinx. It's much more naturalistic than Sin City, for example. The reason it is successful, I think, is because it plays on our natural stereotypes about this kind of story, and tries to turn them on their heads. Without giving too much away (that's for the second part of the post), it involves a man named John Dough ("D'oh!") who goes through life donating blood and standing in line-ups for money, hence the title. He's an extra from central casting. In an old episode of Dr. Katz (what a funny show that was!), one of the comedians was talking about "extras in his movie of life," and that's what John Dough is. That is, until a hooker (Debra Cross) walks into his life, and he gets caught up in her drama.

Rick Spears and Rob G, the creators of Filler, do a wonderful job evoking the pathetic existence of their main character. There's nothing redeeming about John, and even when he becomes involved in Debra's life, it's not like he becomes a tough guy hero savior. When he comes up with his big plan, he has to get help to come up with it, and although it's clever, it's not too clever, and we believe someone like John and his friend could pull it off. John, in many ways, is us - all of us, and that's what makes the story accessible and also a little disconcerting. The thing John lacks that many of us don't is self-confidence - he knows he's a bit player in the grand scheme of life, and when, over halfway through the book, he realizes that he's "stuck as the main character in someone else's story," he rebels against it, because he doesn't want to stick out, he doesn't want to be the star. Carrying a picture is tough work, and John doesn't want to have anything to do with it. His plan involves becoming less noticed, actually, whereas a traditional noir hero (like, say, Marv) would come up with something that would get him more noticed. This is where Filler breaks from its predecessors and becomes something more interesting than a typical noir yarn. Most noir is remote from us, because it's artificial by design - tough guys, tough dames, tough gangsters, tough streets lit by hazy streetlamps and washed with rain. John Dough is not a hero, and his journey, though alien to someone like me (although I did give a hitchhiking hooker a ride once - keep your mind out of the gutter, you scalawags, it was just a car ride, and I didn't know she was a hooker, but that's a story for another day), is one we can appreciate, because it's not about revenge for the murdered whore, it's about a man trying to return to what he considers his "normal" life.

Okay, that's the recommendation. Now, SPOILERS AHEAD!!!!!

As I was reading Filler, I wondered what a woman's reaction to it would be. Johanna linked to all of those bloggers above, but she apparently has not read it. I wonder what her reaction to it would be, or what Rose's reaction to it would be, especially in light of her recent excellent essay. I'm not saying that women can't enjoy this book, but I wonder if, as a man, I have a totally different reaction to it. Debra is the real villain of the book, and I felt gratified that she didn't succeed in screwing John over and got her just desserts. This is probably a common thought among men with regards to entertainment (I said "probably" because I could be totally wrong): we cheer when female villains are brought down a peg, perhaps moreso than when male villains are. The question is: does this indicate misogyny on our part, a latent hatred we can't express in real life because it's totally inappropriate? Is Debra simply a worthy villain who deserves to be led away by the cops, and we should be happy that justice is done and not worry about her gender? Have we gone past the point where gender in our villains matter? I would say no, since part of the surprise of Filler is that Debra is not the stereotypical "hooker with a heart of gold" but a coldly manipulative woman who plays on John's (and our) sympathy to get what she wants - her pimp dead and someone else framed for the murder. Is this progress? Do we admire Spears and Rob G more for making Debra a villain instead of either a woman who needs to be rescued (like Nancy in Sin City, to use a recent cinematic example) or a woman who can kick ass and take names just like a man (too many examples leap immediately to mind). Debra is manipulative, true, but she still needs a fall guy, and uses her feminine wiles to get a man to do her dirty work and take the fall for her. She is like a classic noir femme fatale in this regard, but what makes Filler different, I think, is that the man ultimately triumphs, unlike standard noir fare, where the man usually goes down in a hail of bullets. Can we deal with the "black widow" aspect of the femme fatale more easily when both characters die? I like Filler, but is it because I'm a man? That's what I wonder. Ladies, help me out!

This all goes back to the way women are portrayed in a male-dominated industry. Which is better - the Jean Loring/Sue Dibny way, as in victim-or-crazed-murderer dialectic, or the Debra Cross way, as in manipulative but humbled in the end? You can say neither, because there should be more choices, but I am truly interested in whether one of these portrayals offends women more, or if neither do, or if both do, or if women don't care because they have more important things to worry about. Just a thought.

The Epitome of Liefeld

Looking at this preview piece from Rob Liefeld's upcoming short stint on Teen Titans with Gail Simone, I am struck by how well that this piece sums up Liefeld's artistic career.



For those who dislike him, this piece is pretty funny, as it is full of the things that people generally make fun of him for.

- The increased bust size (on a teen girl, to boot)

- The weird looking hands

- The wristbands covering up the lack of wrists

- The odd anatomy

However, for those who like him, this piece is also a good example of why Liefeld is so popular.

- The piece is very dynamic and striking.

- The piece draws your attention to it, with the stiltled power of the drawing (and yes, some would say it draws them to it because of how bad it looks, like a trainwreck draws in an audience).

So it struck me as quite amusing how well this piece reflects both why Liefeld is mocked as an artist and also why there are so many fans of his art.

What I bought - 27 April 2005

Weird, wild stuff below this post, kids - if you haven't been here in a few days, it's an interesting tour through comic book history. Read and soak up the knowledge! (No, I didn't write it, so I'm not pimping my own stuff.)

Let's get to the floppies!

Containment #4 by Eric Red and Nick Stakal
$3.99, IDW

I have only bought one trade paperback from IDW, so I'm a little confused about their pricing guidelines. This is a five-issue mini-series that will read a whole heck of a lot better as a trade (and I recommend you get the trade, because it's a neat series), but I don't know how much that trade will cost. The five issues separately will cost $20, so if the trade costs less, what's the point of bringing out each individual issue? I just don't know. It's just a weird pricing scheme they have going on. Anyway, despite this ripping off any number of science fiction and horror ideas, it's still a good read. Horrific, a little disturbing, grisly, and tense. It would actually make a pretty good movie. Buy the trade.

Daredevil #72 by Brian Michael Bendis and Alex Maleev
$2.99, Marvel

Sigh. Just when I praise a Daredevil comic to the skies, we get this. I mean, it's a decent little story on its own, but I don't understand how it fits into the grander scheme of things. I don't mind that neither Daredevil nor Matt Murdock even appears in the comic (sorry, he does - on one panel, in the background), but it doesn't seem to have much to do with the whole "what happened while Murdock was Kingpin" story. I mean, the support group is about how these people are dealing with when Matt Murdock was Kingpin, but then we get a story that doesn't seem to have any connection to that at all, plus it's overly talky in the annoying way that Bendis occasionally has. When he's done the overly talky thing in Daredevil in the past, it's usually to advance the story a bit and it's mitigated by the other good stuff happening in the book, but here, that's all there is. I just wonder how it's going to tie into everything else. This is actually the first issue in Bendis's long run where I have thought it would be better to wait for the trade. That annoys me.

Easy Way by Christopher E. Long and Andy Kuhn
$3.99, IDW

The second of three IDW books I bought this week. It's all right, but nothing great. Decent, rough, semi-Tim Sale-type art, a story we've all seen before - recovering drug addict wants to get in on that big score so he can woo back his wife and their daughter - and an okay scheme to get said riches - stealing drugs that the cops have impounded from smugglers, then selling them. Danger is coming, in the form of a drug lord who is going to want his drugs back. There's nothing terribly wrong with it, but there's nothing fantastic either. It's okay, but that's no reason to run out and buy it.

Human Target #21 by Peter Milligan and Cliff Chiang
$2.99, DC/Vertigo

Now here's a title I'm going to miss. Simply excellent. More tangled identity problems for Christopher Chance and Tom McFadden, more violence, more uncertainty about not only who is really who, but what feelings those people actually possess. The whole series has been an examination of what makes us who we are, and the brilliant thing about this last issue is that Milligan doesn't let us off the hook and give us all the answers. Just as Christopher Chance still wonders who he is, so do we still wonder what makes us who we are. It's a challenging series, one that rewards you with many layers of storytelling and action and philosophy, so of course the general reading public never got into it. It's a shame, but 21 issues is 21 issues (plus the excellent mini-series and graphic novel that preceded it). Milligan is sometimes on and sometimes off (Elektra, anyone?), but here he was totally on. Pick up the back issues or the trade paperbacks, because they're worth it.

Jon Sable: Freelance #1 by Mike Grell
$3.99, IDW

I never bought a comic with Grell's creation, but because I'm enjoying GrimJack so much, I thought I'd pick this up. The art is typical Grell - if you like his art, you'll like it, and I like his art, although I was kind of surprised and a bit disappointed by the similarities to The Longbow Hunters in the way he composed some of the pages. As for the story - it's kind of all over the place, and I don't know how it will all tie together. We have a guy testifying against the mob, a murdered African diplomat, Jon Sable appearing in disguise on a television show and avoiding some woman I he was involved with (like I said, I never read it, so I don't know), and carjackers. I think the biggest problem I have with it, in comparison to GrimJack, is that with Ostrander's new mini-series, I didn't know about the character, but it doesn't seem to matter. Here, it seems like you need to know about Sable, and since I don't, it doesn't work for me. The elements for a good comic are there, but I'm a bit adrift. Simply because of that, I will say that you should only get this if you already know quite a bit about the character. It's pretty to look at, though.

Otherworld #2 by Phil Jimenez and Andy Lanning
$2.99, DC/Vertigo

This is an exhausting book to read, because there's so much information packed into the pages. Again, this is probably something you can wait for, because Jimenez sure looks like he's going to take his time with the story. The whole issue is a fight scene between the people from our world and the people who want to stop them, and we find out about everyone's abilities. The problem with this issue as opposed to last issue is, whereas in #1 it was okay to give us snippets of each character's personality, now that we're a second issue in we really want Jimenez to slow down so we can start caring about them. The fact that one of the group betrays the rest doesn't resonate because we've hardly had a chance to get to know them. We learn a little bit more about Siobhan and why she's important, but again - it's a fight issue. That's all.

One more thing: I get really annoyed how "Vertigo" is shorthand, apparently, for "tits" but no "bush." Sorry to be crude, but why is it okay to see Siobhan's breasts but not her pubic area? Her clothes get shredded, but her pubic area remains covered. I know Jimenez doesn't do this sort of thing for puerile interest, since he's gay, but I'd rather both areas remained covered if the editors at DC aren't going to let it all hang out. It's just silly and worse, really than artificially covering up both areas - at least you can say you show no nudity then. If you're going to have nudity, have nudity! Okay, that's my nude rant for today.

Supreme Power #16 by J. Michael Straczynski, Gary Frank, and Jon Sibal with Mark Morales
$2.99, Marvel/MAX

I know there are a lot of people who don't like this series because it moves about as fast as an approaching glacier, and let's face it - they have a point, especially in this issue. Man, it moves slowly. And Mick Martin just posted an excellent short essay about black superheroes, including the two in this comic, that made a lot of sense and caused me to read this differently. That being said, I love this comic. Yes, it moves slowly, but the power politics involved and the dynamic being forged between the characters and the threads being woven by JMS keep me coming back. Each issue adds a little more to this grand drama, and this time, it's how the government plans to get Hyperion back under their aegis. It's an evil little plan, too, but doesn't involve supervillains or bombs - just good old American media attention. And Frank's art is simply stunning. His people look real and solid, and his superheroes look heroic and sometimes otherworldly. It's a beautiful book just to look at. This is one of my favorite books.

Ultimate Secret #2 by Warren Ellis, Steve McNiven, and Mark Morales
$2.99, Marvel

I keep buying these things, just so I can warn you to wait for the trade paperback. Remember those early issues of Planetary? Remember the first Strange Kiss mini-series? Ellis can pack a lot of stuff into 22 pages, but again, with this series, he's just taking his sweet old time. This is a long interrogation scene with Mahr Vehl and Nick Fury, and then some sexual banter between Reed and Sue Richards (it's nice to see a writer actually acknowledging that having a completely rubberized body might come with some perks in the bedroom), and then the Fantastic Four get involved in the big scary Galactus thing. It's all very pretty, but the first two pages shows Mahr Vehl flying through an explosion. Sigh. Not exactly a waste of money, because it's pretty and Ellis is actually writing an interesting story, but the thing that gets me is that Lee and Kirby did it in three issues. Ultimately (I can't stop the punning!) that's what this story is going to be, isn't it? FF #48-50? When is the Ultimate Ultimate Nullifier going to show up? We're seven issues into this epic. So far - probably three issues worth of material.

I'm not bitter, I promise. But there you have it! What do y'all think? How stupid am I? Should I have my head examined? Why, suddenly, does Batman notice the old members of the JLA act differently around him? See why retcons are difficult? If they brainwashed him some years ago, shouldn't they have been acting differently around him for some time? Why bring back a lame-ass villain like Eclipso? Oh, so many questions!!!!

My comics, right or wrong?

Pol's excellent post about the "darkening" of the DCU and its connection with September 11th, and the subsequent comments that followed, especially T's, made me think about what role politics have in comics. I'm not going to get too much into a political rant, since this a comics web site and we're all friends here, but I'd like to address T's comment about "progressive liberalism." Go read his comment, it's very interesting!

Okay, now that you're back, I'll lay my cards on the table. I'm one of those progressive liberals T doesn't like - although I don't "blame America first," as he puts it, so maybe I'm not. In his response, Michael asks when "progressive" became a dirty word, and I wouldn't call the kind of people T is talking about "progressive," but it's just a label, so I'm not going to worry about it too much. It's the kind of people T is talking about, and their effect on comics specifically, that I want to address.

T claims that the liberals who came of age in the 1960s and 1970s, hijacked educational institutions, and always blame America for the world's ills are what has changed comics, because they are now the writers of these comics (Winnick especially) and they have that mindset and they bring it to their work. I won't argue his politics or his history (that "progressives undermined the Vietnam War" is debatable, since it was one of the most poorly fought and poorly run wars in human history), but I will question his take on superheroes. I would argue that superheroes, by their very nature, are the most conservative characters you are going to find in popular culture. He cites Denny O'Neil turning Green Arrow into an unapologetic liberal who "makes sure he's ALWAYS right." He cites the fact that Superman has become an object of derision because he represents the American ideal, while Batman is lauded because he represents hating America. He points out that moral relativism has replaced black and white morality, and that in the aftermath of September 11th, there was much hand-wringing among the comics elite about how America brought it on itself, and that this sort of introspection would never have happened in the 1940s, when Captain America gleefully slaughtered Nazis left and right.

Well, he's right. That doesn't change the fact that superheroes are conservative. Batman - liberal? Superman, with his restraint in using his power (even back in the "good old days,") and respect for the common man, has always been far more liberal than Batman, who is almost fascist in his belief that things are right and wrong. Frank Miller certainly portrayed him as a fascist, and if I'm not mistaken, the promotional material for the Batman black and white books was "There's black. There's white. And then there's Batman." (Or something to that effect.) Batman has no time for moral relativism. He has shut out any human emotions in his quest for justice. Who's married? Superman. Who has a job that allows him to interact with the people he cares for? Superman. Batman, living in his mansion like a plutocrat, has never had to deal with what makes a man steal a loaf of bread for his children. He just dispenses justice to lawbreakers.

Most of the most popular comic book characters in recent times have been "take-no-shit-and-screw-the-reasons" kind of people. T probably doesn't like The Authority, since they represent the ultimate "hating America" kind of superheroes. Well, what if they were American, and went out and kicked all kinds of ass and made every other country fall in line? Would they be okay then? The Authority is the fascist superhero triumphant, just like Miracleman was, just like Adrian Veidt was, just like the Squadron Supreme was. You may argue that they are "liberal" dictatorships, but technically, so was Stalinist Russia. I say that most comics writers working today are more concerned with showing that their heroes take no shit from anyone, and that it's their brand of justice or you die. The darkening of the DCU, I would argue, stems from Reagan's America (1986, the year of Dark Knight and Watchmen, after all) when civil liberties were curtailed in the name of law and order, and also from Bush's America, where even more civil liberties have been curtailed. Yes, we see lip service paid to the "feelings" of the terrorists, and every writer these days wants to make Hydra a sympathetic organization, but how often has Captain America fought actively against the United States? How many superheroes have joined Hydra? Cap freakin' kills the terrorists these days, when back in Lee and Kirby's time, he wouldn't dare. Cap has gotten darker, not because he's more liberal and there's cultural relativism, but because in the current zeitgeist, people don't want to face what's out there and are yearning for a time in the past - the essence of conservatism, not liberalism.

T, yearning for a time when comics portrayed things in stark black and white, ignores that every art form, when it "grows up," must necessarily begin viewing the world in shades of gray. He took me to task for viewing the early Batman comics through a cynical eye, and I can buy that, because they were written for children. Bob Kane and Bill Finger and the rest could not but have been aware of the many nuances in America's relationship with Nazi Germany, but they didn't put that stuff in the comics because they didn't think children could handle the fact that the world is a subtle and sometimes unpleasant place, and America is not always right. Go back and read Beowulf or the Song of Roland. These are like early comics - everything is in black and white, and the hero kills the monster and gets the girl and dies tragically but heroically, and the status quo is reinforced. Unfortunately, especially in regard to Roland (since it was based on a historical event), it's complete bullshit. But that was literature, not for children, but for conservatives, and literature today is much more nuanced (and better, I would argue). Real life is messy, and the United States isn't always right, and our government has betrayed our ideals more often than we want to think. If comics wants to remain a medium for telling stories to children, then that's fine, and that what we will get. I don't watch the superhero cartoons, but I would bet Superman is well respected in them, because he's the hero. I watched some of the Batman cartoons years ago when they first started, and although Gotham was all very gloomy, they weren't nearly as dark as the comics. If comic books are to be an adult medium, they need to address these things. It sounds as if T doesn't mind that, as long as there are counterbalances to the "cynical, self-hating" crazies who are currently running DC. Well, the next time a superhero joins the Taliban or fights our troops in Iraq or tries to have the president (the real one, not Lex Luthor) impeached, he can point that out and laugh. Until then, I have to disagree with him.

A point: that's not to say there's not raging liberalism in comics. However, he was looking just at the DCU and its mainstream superheroes. If he had said, "Look! Mark Millar is humiliating the president on the White House lawn!" I would have agreed with him and pointed out that Millar isn't American, so he can hate us without loathing himself. Yes, there's raging liberalism around in comics, but I think that it simply reflects the tastes of the reading public. People who read comics like their boutique titles liberal and their mainstream superhero comics conservative. That's why Chuck Dixon (to use one of T's examples) gets work in superhero comics (I don't know why he's "nowhere in sight" at DC these days, although he hasn't been for a while, so it probably has nothing to do with the "darkening" T talks about), but his other stuff doesn't sell. I read Iron Ghost last week, and was intrigued, but it's the ultimate conservative fantasy - killing Nazis, but not even bureaucratic Nazis, but Nazis actively involved in war crimes! We'll see how it goes down with the reading public. Maybe it could be a test case.

Anyway, that's my two cents. As I said before, interesting take, T, even though I disagree. The history of America through comics - who'd have thought?

Three 4/20 Books That I Read So That You Do Not Have To

You know the basic concept, I take three books that I have not really heard many people talk about and I discuss them (with spoilers!) and then ask you folk to tell me about some books that I might have missed this past week.

Special All-Marvel Edition!!!

Spider-Man: Breakout #1 - This was, in my opinion, the best writing that Tony Bedard has done for Marvel so far. However, that may not be much of a compliment, as I have found his Exiles and Rogue to be fairly lackluster. That being said, he takes part of what made Negation so great - character interaction - and applies it to Breakout, and it works well (heck, Negation also was about a prison breakout, so that's another neat connection).

This issue is basically about two rival gangs of super villains. The U-Foes on one side, and Crossfire on the other side (with a bunch of other random villains with Crossfire. Both sides were played off each other by a Guardsman, and they have been trying to kill each other all the while that they were in prison together, and these attempts on each other's lives have continued since they escaped.

That is the main story, with Spider-Man getting mixed in the middle of it all.

The characterizations are deep, and Bedard uses these older Marvel villains really well. The only problem is that we really are not told who these people ARE and what they DO. I mean, I know all of them, but you cannot expect a new reader to, and I think Bedard (or the editors, who would have been VERY well served to put a character guide in this comic) really dropped the ball there.

The art by Manuel Garcia is good, nothing awesome, but he gets the job done, and his style served the writing style Bedard is going for (slightly darker than average fare).

I would not recommend it generally, but if you're a fan of older Marvel characters, I think there is a good chance that you will enjoy it.

Marvel Knights 4 #17 - I continue to be impressed by Roberto Aguirre-Sacasa's improvement as a comic book writer. He is like an old pro at this superhero stuff now.

In this issue, he effortlessly mixes together continuity, story, time travel, flashbacks, alternate realities....and it all works for a cohesive, interesting plot. In addition, his dialogue is both strong AND purposeful.

And his character of H.E.R.B.I.E. is cool.

He is being killed by Jim Muniz' art, though, which is a shame.

If you combined Aguirre-Sacasa's CURRENT storyline with the art from the FIRST storyline on this title, you would have one of the best books from Marvel, easy.

Sadly, that mixture is not present, and the art is so off-putting, I do not know if I can even recommend this book.

So I guess not recommended.

Hercules #1 - I don't get this book. I am pretty sure that Tieri is saying that Hercules should be treated better, as he is this epic hero...but then Tieri treats him like trash.

I don't get it.

In addition, a lot of the writing (ESPECIALLY the dialogue) reminds me of Ron Zimmerman's early efforts, when Zimmerman was still writing comic books like he wrote for TV shows...but that was understandable in Zimmerman's case as he was, in fact, a TV show writer. Tieri is not...so it is weird.

Also, the book is about how some ancient villain is trying to make Hercules look bad with a reality show starring Hercules. Wacky, eh? So the perfect artist is, of course, Mark Texeria! "Wait," you might say, "Brian,Texeria does not fit that type of story at all!"

You would be right. I was just being sarcastic.

Texeria's art (with inks by Jimmy Palmiotti) is nice, but does not fit the story at all.

And I will admit, the story is clever enough, but it just does not fit. The juxtaposition between the two ideas (Hercules is an epic hero and Hercules is a big buffoon) just is too jarring.

Not recomended!

Okay, on to the books that I did not read that you folks can tell me about:

Defex #6

Small Hands Graphic Novel

Four Letter Worlds Graphic Novel

Cholly and Flytrap #3

Detonator #3

Small Gods #8

Who Are The Best Genre Writers Out There?

Very early on in the blog, I wrote a bit about which genres people felt were most lacking in comics.

On that same note, I was just wondering about who would be the best writers that we currently have in the medium (as past writers would just be way too hard) FOR those genres?

Discounting, of course, Alan Moore, Neil Gaiman, Frank Miller, Warren Ellis and Grant Morrison, as they would skew the results.

Who is the best romance writer out there?

Who is comic's best comedy writer?

Who writes the best western comics?

Crime?

Horror?

Fantasy?

I think comic's best comedy writer is currently Kyle Baker. I lurv Keith Giffen, but he needs a scripter to be really awesome, so can I really pick him over the consistently humorous Kyle Baker? I say thee nay! Eric Powell deserves a mention.

Best war writer has to be Garth Ennis, in a cake walk. No one else even comes close, I do not think.

Romance? I dunno....Tom Beland, maybe? Terry Moore, perhaps? J. Torres? Jaime Hernandez? Okay, I will take a leap, and choose Andi Watson. Not many people WRITE just plain ol' romance comics anymore, but Watson is one of the few (and he is quite good at it).

Mystery? Is there a good mystery writer out there? I think Greg addressed this on his old blog before I kidnapped him, and it is true...there are not many writers out there even WRITING mysteries, let alone GOOD ones. I guess I will have to go with Brian Azzarello here, if only because of the dearth of other options. I mean, I was starting to seriously consider Mark Waid for his Ruse stories!!

Crime? This is a close race between Ed Brubaker and Brian Michael Bendis. I think as of right now, Ed Brubaker is the better choice. But Bendis is still showing in the pages of Powers that he can still bring the crime drama.

Horror? Is either Hellboy or Walking Dead truly a HORROR comic? If so, then I would heartily recommend either Mignola or Kirkman, but I do not think that they ARE, so I will have to go with one of the few, true, horror writers out there in the business right now, Steve Niles (Phil Hester deserves a mention).

Adventure? New Frontier made a believer out of me, so I will greatly look forward to any adventure story written by Darwyn Cooke. Honorable mentions to Garth Ennis, Andy Diggle, Ed Brubaker and Brian K. Vaughan.

Fantasy? Kurt Busiek is doing a bang-up job with Conan right now, but I will have to stick with one of my favorites, Bill Willingham, for his work on Fables. Some fantastic fantasy going on in that book.

Western? It is pretty much a matter of choosing between Jeff Mariotte and Chuck Dixon, and for this particular category, I choose Jeff Mariotte. Superheroes? I would choose Dixon, but strictly Westerns, I think Mariotte has the upper hand.

Science Fiction? Copout city here. Orson Scott Card. What, can you think of someone better than him at science fiction?

Agree with my picks?

Disagree?

Think I'm missing a genre?

Think I'm missing out someone who deserves a spot (or at least a mention)?

Let me know!