tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31466165308902036342024-03-05T08:04:37.592-05:00Irrelevant ComicsYan Basquehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12188814820654379029noreply@blogger.comBlogger231125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146616530890203634.post-49556561499760845062013-11-09T09:30:00.000-05:002013-11-09T09:32:46.512-05:00Journey Into Amazing - episodes 1 to 5!<iframe allowfullscreen="" height="360" mozallowfullscreen="" msallowfullscreen="" oallowfullscreen="" scrolling="no" src="//html5-player.libsyn.com/embed/episode/id/2502109/height/360/width/640/theme/standard/direction/no/autoplay/no/autonext/no/thumbnail/yes/preload/no/no_addthis/no/" style="border: none;" webkitallowfullscreen="" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
I have been doing a pretty terrible job of promoting it here, but the first five issues of the podcast I started with a friend of mine, Journey Into Amazing, are all available now for your listening pleasure.<br />
<br />
There are many ways to listen:<br />
<ol>
<li>Using the player above</li>
<li><a href="http://journeyintoamazing.tumblr.com/">On our official Tumblr page</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.facebook.com/journeyintoamazing">On our official Face page</a></li>
<li><a href="https://itunes.apple.com/ca/podcast/journey-into-amazing/id725274063?mt=2">On iTunes</a></li>
</ol>
<div>
The podcast follows the adventures of two guys reading their way through all 700 issues of Amazing Spider-Man. In the first five episodes, we cover almost the full run of Steve Ditko, bringing us up to issue #34. Both of us were fairly new to Ditko's art and if nothing else this experience has turned us both into <i>huge</i> fans. I think if you listen (and especially if you read along) you will also be convinced!</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Each episode also features some reviews of current comics in the second act of the show. You can skip that part if you want.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
If you listen, we'd love to hear from you, so please leave comments here or on any of our other platforms listed above. Reviews on iTunes would be particularly appreciated, as it really helps us find an audience.</div>
Yan Basquehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12188814820654379029noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146616530890203634.post-75177956318393562962013-10-31T23:39:00.002-04:002013-10-31T23:39:22.205-04:00Random Thoughts on Previews #302Marvel<br />
<ul>
<li>So after "Marvel Now" comes "All-New Marvel Now"? And they're still doing "point ones"? When will the insanity end? </li>
<li><b>Inhuman</b> #1 - I'll probably get the first issue. I'm reluctant to add more Marvel books to my pull list after finally cutting it down to a reasonable size, but I can't help it. I'm weak. </li>
<li><b>All-New Invaders</b> #1 - When did James Robinson switch over to Marvel? I'm always happy when people leave DC, but this book doesn't really have any appeal to me otherwise. John Cassaday covers, urgh.</li>
<li>Okay, that whole "#22.now = #1" makes no fucking sense. Who dreams up these gimmicks at Marvel? </li>
<li><b>Avengers World</b> #1 & 2 - Jonathan Hickman's Avengers epic is getting pretty freaking expensive to follow. Or, wait, is this replacing New Avengers? Hmm. All I know is that I'm not going to buy three Hickman Avengers books anymore after Infinity ends. Especially not $4 dollar ones that double-ship half the time. </li>
<li><b>Black Widow</b> #1 & 2 - Phil Noto on art. Sold. </li>
<li><b>All-New X-Factor</b> #1 & 2 - Peter David and Carmine Di Giandomenico. Tempting. But why is Gambit on this team? Blargh. </li>
<li><b>Mighty Avengers</b> #5 - I'm super into this series so far, so yeah, I'm in. Despite Greg Land's art.</li>
<li>There's a whole section of Inhumanity tie-ins and I don't really know what that is. I didn't realize there was some kind of event on top of the Inhuman series, and why isn't Inhuman #1 in the Inhumanity section? Confusing. Anyway, I'm probably just going to ignore all this.</li>
<li><b>Miracleman</b> #1 & 2 - Alan Moore is credited as "the original writer," as in, his name doesn't appear in the description because he specifically requested not to be mentioned. This whole thing makes me a little uncomfortable. Don't think I'm gonna get this. Some of those covers are really nice, though. </li>
<li><b>Empire of the Dead: Act One</b> #1 - Written by George Romero with art by Alex Maleev. Meh, I don't know. I like Maleev, but do we really need this?</li>
<li><b>New Avengers</b> #14 - Oh no, hey, this series is still going, and for some reason it's in a completely different section than the other Hickman Avengers titles. I don't get it. Also, which one of these books will I have to drop?</li>
<li><b>The Amazing Spider-Man: The Movie Adaptation</b> #1 - WHY?</li>
<li><b>Daredevil</b> #35 - Man, Chris Samnee is still drawing this? This is the book that I most regret dropping this year. Why did I do that?!</li>
<li>I kinda want that Warlock collection.</li>
</ul>
<div>
Dark Horse</div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>I don't really have anything to say about any of these books. Except maybe that Brian Wood's run on Conan the Barbarian better end soon because I'm like 15 issues behind and for some reason I can't stop buying it anyway and the issues are just gonna keep piling up until it ends.</li>
</ul>
<div>
DC Comics</div>
</div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>Everything looks awful.</li>
<li>Gothtopia lolz</li>
<li>Catwoman is the new Robin?!</li>
<li>What's wrong with Hal Jordan's face?!</li>
</ul>
<div>
IMAGE</div>
<div>
<ul>
<li><b>Deadly Class</b> #1 - I don't know, I'm not really feeling it, but I'll probably try the first issue.</li>
<li><b>EGOs</b> #1 - Same.</li>
<li><b>Bad Dog</b> #6 - OMG, why did it take like a million years for this last issue to come out!?</li>
<li>Final issue of Prophet! Sad. Such a great book. </li>
</ul>
<div>
OTHER</div>
</div>
<div>
<ul>
<li><b>The Midas Flesh</b> #2 (of 8) (Boom) - That looks kinda cool. Never saw the solicits for the first issue, but I'll try to remember to pick it up if they have it in the store. </li>
<li><b>RASL: The Complete Edition</b> HC - I want that.</li>
<li>I don't really understand the appeal of a Twilight Zone ongoing series.</li>
<li>Bad Ass #1 (Dynamite) - "If Kick-Ass and Deadpool had a baby, it would be bad ass!" That sounds awful.</li>
<li>Apparently Al Ewing's run on Jennifer Blood is pretty good. I should check that out.</li>
<li>Everything that Valiant is publishing right now looks like all right. I kinda wish I hadn't dropped Harbinger.</li>
</ul>
</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
Yan Basquehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12188814820654379029noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146616530890203634.post-16945251898155247232013-10-30T22:46:00.000-04:002013-10-30T22:46:55.153-04:00Review: Superman/Wonder Woman #1<div class="p1">
This post was adapted and expanded from <a href="https://twitter.com/yanbasque">some tweets I tweeted earlier</a>. It is also getting <a href="http://yanbasque.tumblr.com/post/65581255911/a-post-about-superman-wonder-woman-1-by-dc-comics">cross-posted to Tumblr</a>.</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
There was a guy at the comic book shop this evening when I went to pick up my comics. He's often there. He's kinda cool. I like him. We talked. He convinced me to buy a comic book that I would never in a million years have picked up otherwise. Superman/Wonder Woman #1. </div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
Disclaimer #1: This is the first DC book I've bought in forever. I can't even remember the last time I bought a DC book. </div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
Disclaimer #2: I have zero interest in Superman and Wonder Woman as a couple. The idea does nothing for me. In fact, when it was first announced, I found it kind of revolting and it left a bad taste in my mouth. </div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
Disclaimer #3: I hate Tony Daniel's art. </div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
Disclaimer #4: I expected to hate this in every way imaginable. But the dude was so enthusiastic about it. He said it was his favourite single issue of the year and he's a huge Wonder Woman fan and he was skeptical about the whole super-couple thing, too, and as far as I can tell, he's a discerning comic reader with a fine taste. So I thought, sure, why not?</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
Anyway, I read it. And it was... kinda meh? The art is exactly as bad as I expected it to be, but I kind of enjoyed the characters voices. Both of them. I think Charles Soule is a good writer and he has a pretty good grasp of these characters. As much as I can tell from a first issue anyway. He makes the super-couple idea work better than thought possible. I could almost buy the idea if I tried to forget that it's so completely unnecessary.</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
But where it fell apart for me was the panels where Superman and Wonder Woman kinda almost but not really have sex in silhouette with the red background, superimposed on the fight with Doomsday. There are at least three things wrong with just those two pages:</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
1. The silhouette thing is just cheesy and awful, not to mention that Tony Daniel apparently doesn't understand how silhouettes work. Like, he doesn't get the concept of characters being lit from behind? It would have been easy enough to set the scene in front of a window or by candle light or something, but no, they're actually lying on the bed and they're wearing clothes and the clothes are lit normally but their skin is pitch black for some reason? I don't even know if I'm explaining this properly but it makes NO SENSE.</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
2. It's just unnecessary. Like, yeah, we get it. They're a couple. They're dating. That implies that they're probably being intimate with each other in one way or another. If they had given us some gratuitous money shot, that would've been something. It would have been an awful thing, but still at thing. But this tacky softcore mildly suggestive interrupted coitus scene just adds nothing.</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
3. The whole cutting back and forth between violence and a (non-)sex scene... I've seen it before and I'm tired of it.</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
Aside from that, it was an okay issue with some decent writing and some mediocre-to-bad art. Also, Dooomsday, who is the most boring villain ever. </div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
Something I had forgotten about DC Comics that I really dislike: Those colour-coded captions for the interior monologues with the character logos. Like, yeah, I get it, it's Superman's thoughts. You didn't have to make it that obvious, I could've figured it out on my own. </div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
Also, I guess people still hate the Justice League in the New 52. Like civilians, I mean. Normal people inside the fictional universe. They hate super-heroes. Probably because super-heroes in the New 52 are jerks. That was something I really hated about the reboot but I figured it would have changed by now. Apparently not.</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
The more I think about this, the more I regret buying this comic. I also realize now that some part of me was genuinely (and almost secretly) hoping that this comic would surprise me and win me over. I really miss these characters. I haven't touched DC's books for ages but I wanted to read this and find out that I'd been missing something. I wanted DC to prove me wrong. But no, not reading DC comics was absolutely the right decision to make.</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
In a way, the fact that this comic book didn't turn out that bad in spite of everything is almost worst. If it had been a truly horrible comic with no redeeming qualities whatsoever, I'd just be like, whatever, DC sucks. But this was almost halfway decent. I could at least see that there was some potential there, but that just ends up being a total bummer because it's dragged down by the sheer DC-ness of it, by which I mean everything that I've come to associate with DC Comics since the New 52, like what a grim and depressing world it is and how awful and unhappy all the characters seem to be and the shitty Jim Lee clone art that's so dreary it makes you want to never look at a comic book again.</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="p1">
Ugh. Don't read the New 52, kids. It's depressing.</div>
Yan Basquehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12188814820654379029noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146616530890203634.post-92031569161375368832013-10-10T00:14:00.001-04:002013-10-13T15:23:44.199-04:00Journey Into Amazing Episode 001<iframe allowfullscreen="" height="360" mozallowfullscreen="" msallowfullscreen="" oallowfullscreen="" scrolling="no" src="http://html5-player.libsyn.com/embed/episode/id/2502109/height/360/width/640/theme/standard/direction/no/autoplay/no/autonext/no/thumbnail/yes/preload/no/no_addthis/no/" style="border: none;" webkitallowfullscreen="" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
Well, I have been busy doing things. Things like moving and working and just about anything other than writing about comics on this blog. But I warned you something was coming, and now it has arrived.<br />
<br />
Welcome to the first episode of Journey Into Amazing, a new podcast about two dudes (myself and co-host Ariel Esteban Cayer) reading their way through all 700 issues of Amazing Spider-Man.<br />
<br />
This week we jump right in with the first five issues, written by
Stan Lee and Steve Ditko, and featuring the first appearances of The
Chameleon, The Vulture, Dr. Octopus and The Sandman.<br />
<br />
In the second half of the show, we talk about some more recent
comics, including Trillium #3, Mara #6, some Robocop mini-series and
Mighty Avengers #1 and #2.<br />
<br />
I'm super-excited about this project and it seems like the perfect excuse for me to start posting on this blog again. Rising from the ashes, etc.<br />
<br />
Please help spread the word by sharing, tweeting, tumblring and facebooking. And tell us what you think in the comments below. In the near-future, we'll have a dedicated page for this podcast on tumblr, where we will also be posting panels from the comic books we review, but I will continue to cross-post new episodes to this blog each week.<br />
<br />
Enjoy!<br />
<br />
00:00:00 - intro & theme song<br /><br />
ACT 1<br /><br />
00:01:30 - jumping right into our discussion of AMS #1-5<br />00:04:45 - Spidey’s first appearance in Amazing Fantasy #15<br />00:13:55 - AMS #1: first appearance of The Chameleon, guest appearance by the Fantastic Four, Spidey and Johnny Storm BFFs<br />00:21:16 - ASM #2: first appearance of The Vulture, first appearance of the Tinkerer<br />00:22:13 - ASM #3: first appearance of Dr. Octopus, Steve Ditko’s art<br />00:28:39 - ASM #4: first appearance of Sandman, J. Jonah Jameson as antagonist<br />00:37:58 - ASM #5: guest appearances by Dr. Doom and the Fantastic Four<br />00:41:30 - closing words on AMS #1-5, what’s up with the spidey signal?<br /><br />
ACT 2<br /><br />
00:43:32 - moving on to weekly comic reviews<br />00:44:05 - Trillium #1-3, by Jeff Lemire and Jose Vilarrubia<br />00:52:10 - Mara #1-6, by Brian Wood, Ming Doyle, Jordie Bellaire<br />01:00:30 - Robocop: Last Stand #1-3, by Frank Miller, Steven Grant, Korkut Oztekin, Michael Garland, with covers by Declan Shalvey<br />01:04:55 - Mighty Avengers #1-2, by Al Ewing, Greg Land, Jay Leisten, Frank D’Armata<br /><br />
01:18:50 - closing comments Yan Basquehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12188814820654379029noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146616530890203634.post-91033846376184911962013-09-29T14:30:00.000-04:002013-09-29T14:30:09.284-04:00SOMETHING IS ABOUT TO HAPPENHey, everyone. I haven't updated this blog in about 20 months. But I'm preparing a comeback. And it's going to be... amazing.Yan Basquehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12188814820654379029noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146616530890203634.post-64543768662269137832012-02-01T08:09:00.000-05:002012-02-01T08:09:08.223-05:00The obligatory "Before Watchmen" reaction postMight as well get this one out of the way.<br />
<br />
The story is splattered all over the internet this morning, including on DC's official blog, <a href="http://dcu.blog.dccomics.com/">The Source</a>, (which appears to be unable to deal with the heavy traffic as I write this), various mainstream entertainment news sites and the usual suspects in the comics web. But in case you haven't heard, it boils down to this: DC is releasing a series of miniseries collectively called "Before Watchmen" (I guess they couldn't come up with anything better than an obvious working title) by various writers and artists. Each series focuses on a different character from the original series/graphic novel by Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons. Among the creators involved are Brian Azzarello, J. Michael Straczynski, Darwyn Cooke and Amanda Conner.<br />
<br />
Here's a quote from the announcement on The Source:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
“It’s our responsibility as publishers to find new ways to keep all of our characters relevant,” said DC Entertainment Co-Publishers Dan DiDio and Jim Lee. “After twenty five years, the Watchmen are classic characters whose time has come for new stories to be told. We sought out the best writers and artists in the industry to build on the complex mythology of the original.”</blockquote>
It's times like these that I'm so happy I decided to name this blog "Irrelevant Comics." I'm so glad that DiDio and Lee hired JMS to make this classic work "relevant" again. Remember when he was hired to make Superman relevant? That was the time Superman went on a long, boring walk across America where nothing happened and nobody gave a shit. Not even JMS, apparently, since he couldn't be bothered to finish it.<br />
<br />
Yeah, it's pretty depressing that JMS is considered one of the "best writers in the industry," but it's not like it makes a big difference to me in the end, since I wasn't planning on reading these books anyway.<br />
<br />
What I find more upsetting about the announcement is the confirmation of Darwyn Cooke's involvement in the project. Other than Amanda Connor, he's the only creator involved I really give a shit about, and sadly I am going to find it incredibly difficult to take him seriously after this. Remember this video?<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.youtube.com/embed/xgMZl0FJsx4?feature=player_embedded' frameborder='0'></iframe></div>
<br />
In it, Cooke talks about how he doesn't plan to return to superhero comics "in any big way" (what could be bigger than a Watchmen prequel?!), at least not until the industry stops "catering to the perverted needs of 45-year-old men."<br />
<br />
I remember when this video was first posted, a lot of people were upset about his comment on lesbian heroes. It bothered me too, but I chose to give him the benefit of the doubt at the time because I still had respect for him as a creator and thought his point was mostly about superhero comics not being for kids anymore. (Who says lesbian characters can't be for kids? But let's not get into that right now.)<br />
<br />
But now that we know he's a hypocrite and a profiteer? I'm not feeling so generous. Watchmen (along with Frank Miller's Batman work in the 1980s) is one of the seminal works responsible for the "maturing" of superhero comics' content. It features graphic violence, foul language, sex and even rape - all the things Cooke claims have no place in superhero comics. So what the fuck?<br />
<br />
That DC would eventually go back to milk the Watchmen cash cow seemed like an inevitability. The question was when it and how it would happen. And with or without Alan Moore's blessings. There's a lot of history here, and I'm not sure there's much point in me going over it again. In a nutshell, relations between Moore and DC have been bad ever since he stopped working for them, and a lot of it was directly related who owns the rights to these characters.<br />
<br />
My friend and fellow blogger Alan David Doane has written a very persuasive short piece on why DC's decision to go ahead with the Watchmen prequels despite Alan Moore's objections is (in his opinion) unethical. You can <a href="http://www.change.org/petitions/dc-comics-end-plans-for-sequels-to-watchmen">read it here</a>, and if you agree with it you can also sign the petition.<br />
<br />
I agree with a lot of what that petition says, and that's why I'm sharing it here and encouraging people to read it and decide for themselves. Personally, I don't feel strongly enough about it to add my name to the list. I think the prequels are in very poor taste. I think Alan Moore got the shitty end of the stick. But it's also not that different from the way Marvel treated Kirby, or the way DC treated Siegel and Shuster. I'm not saying that two or three wrongs make a right, or that we should ignore one injustice because there are other injustices out there. It's just that I've realized and more or less come to terms with the fact that DC and Marvel are big, ugly, profit-driven corporations, which is pretty much synonymous with unethical behaviour. What they're doing here is ugly, but so is everything else they do. And if I'm going to start signing petitions over this case, then I might as well stop supporting them completely and never buy another one of their books, or else I'm going to feel like a total hypocrite.<br />
<br />
That's just my take on it. I think being a fan of (or consumer of) any mass entertainment necessarily involves a certain amount of cognitive dissonance and ethical negotiations with oneself. I feel the same way about television and Hollywood and video games. Hell, I feel that way about EVERYTHING I spend my money on, since it's all part of a giant system I am generally opposed to. (Call it capitalism, I suppose.) Again, I'm not saying the way to deal with these concerns is to shove them at the bottom of your psyche and ignore them. It's important to be aware of these things that make us uncomfortable, and to think and write and talk about them, and whenever possible try to fight them. And if you decide that the best way to do this is for you to sign the petition, then sign it. For me, it isn't.<br />
<br />
(Whoa! Did I ever get side-tracked, there!)<br />
<br />
I'm not going to buy any of these Watchmen prequels, and I feel this is the best way to send a message to DC. A few hundred names on a petition is not going to do much. The only thing that's going to make a difference at the end of the day is whether the books sell well or not.<br />
<br />
And here comes the depressing part: Of course they're going to sell well. They're going to be at the top of the charts and (like the New 52) they will be deemed a success. Before the books come out, Dan DiDio is going to be quoted saying he's puzzled that fans are reacting negatively without having read the books. Guaranteed. And then after the books have come out, if anybody points out that they sucked (after having read them), he's going to point out that they were best-sellers, so obviously the opinion of that reader doesn't matter.<br />
<br />
Notice the catch-22 here? Our opinion doesn't matter until we've bought and read the book. And once we've bought and read the book, our opinion doesn't matter because we've already paid for it.Yan Basquehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12188814820654379029noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146616530890203634.post-67117494292675245872012-01-30T21:08:00.001-05:002012-01-30T21:08:23.980-05:00Is It Wednesday Yet?I'm glad I managed to write some comics reviews last week and I hope I can keep the momentum going. But as always, there are things happening in live that could possibly get in the way.<br />
<br />
Plus, I thought I'd have lots of time to read comics after finishing A Clash of Kings, but I couldn't help it and bought A Storm of Swords and started reading it this morning on the way to work. I'm sorry.<br />
<br />
Anyway. Some new comics this week:<br />
<ul>
<li>Animal Man #6 (DC)</li>
<li>Swamp Thing #6 (DC)</li>
<li>Sweet Tooth #30 (DC)</li>
<li>Alpha Girl #1 (Image)</li>
<li>Fatale #2 (Image)</li>
<li>Amazing Spider-Man #679 (Marvel)</li>
<li>Punisher #8 (Marvel)</li>
<li>Winter Soldier #1 (Marvel)</li>
</ul>
I've fallen behind on both of those DC titles, so I hope they haven't started sucking and I'm not even aware of it. I'll try to catch up on them before Wednesday and let you know what I think.<br />
<br />
Sweet Tooth is back on track now after a brief flashback story about the origins of the plague, which was illustrated (quite nicely) by Matt Kindt. That flashback made me a little uncomfortable for reasons that I still want to write about someday, but probably not today. (Hint: cultural appropriation.) But I'm not letting that turn me off too much, because other than that one thing, Sweet Tooth is still my favourite comic.<br />
<br />
I've put Alpha Girl on the list even though I'm not totally convinced that I'm going to get it myself, but it's a new series from Image so it's probably at least worth flipping through at the store. Something to do with zombies, unfortunately. I'm a bit tired of zombies and vampires.<br />
<br />
Fatale #1 was great, so I'm really looking forward to the second issue.<br />
<br />
And Winter Soldier... Blargh. I'm about 90% sure I'm not going to buy that, unless I get a sudden urge to spend more money than I should. which happens a lot, so it's not completely out of the question.<br />
<br />
PS: Follow me on <a href="https://twitter.com/yanbasque">Twitter</a> and/or on <a href="http://yanbasque.tumblr.com/">Tumblr</a>.Yan Basquehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12188814820654379029noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146616530890203634.post-37265363562393119182012-01-28T09:23:00.000-05:002012-01-28T09:23:14.747-05:00Reviews: Amazing Spider-Man, Scarlet Spider, The Ray, Punisher<b>The Amazing Spider-Man #678</b><br />
<b>Written by Dan Slott; pencils by Humberto Ramos; inks by Victor Olazaba; colours by Edgar Delgado; Marvel</b><br />
<br />
Instead of writing a review I think I'll just show you this image:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhszfdV5Fmz2YuCSgx4KQyrlFWbOWdd25EvaYvRdCcPKrDUkNsfsPcHCdPPrSNh0cl-csNRnpIkO5UhArQvCFml2sX8WJ9FzxesHZPI7SDKqQ1morSCIZB6w3ZvmmnjJnEAOo9kiini2BSA/s1600/IMG.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhszfdV5Fmz2YuCSgx4KQyrlFWbOWdd25EvaYvRdCcPKrDUkNsfsPcHCdPPrSNh0cl-csNRnpIkO5UhArQvCFml2sX8WJ9FzxesHZPI7SDKqQ1morSCIZB6w3ZvmmnjJnEAOo9kiini2BSA/s320/IMG.jpg" width="270" /></a></div>
<br />
Is this Spider-Man or Mr. Freaking Fantastic? Because that does not look like a human body to me. I think Ramos' art is a little too cartoony (in the sense that he distorts figures, proportions, faces, etc. for effect) for my tastes.<br />
<br />
Otherwise, I'm still sort of enjoying this book, but it's hard to forget that it's $4 and twice a month. That's a lot of money for something that I'm only kind of enjoying. Consider it on probation.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiAs_fU7gJxVLRLa0H9dR1cdvrKspEUiRlHH9r7XoqqmDJd_6XmxMKJw7SUCO2eGBwIGO0GPWfH8rKYyfX1ZHqiU_gD6h1GxaoGOclqfH9EYhWLHk8q2jgr-LoT2SKDXEuN5m2Xm4zX9x2h/s1600/IC_ScarletSpider_1_Cover.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiAs_fU7gJxVLRLa0H9dR1cdvrKspEUiRlHH9r7XoqqmDJd_6XmxMKJw7SUCO2eGBwIGO0GPWfH8rKYyfX1ZHqiU_gD6h1GxaoGOclqfH9EYhWLHk8q2jgr-LoT2SKDXEuN5m2Xm4zX9x2h/s320/IC_ScarletSpider_1_Cover.jpg" width="210" /></a></div>
<b>Scarlet Spider #1</b><br />
<b>Written by Christopher Yost; pencils by Ryan Stegman; inks by Michael Babinski; colours by Marte Gracia; Marvel</b><br />
<br />
I bought this out of curiosity (I like to try #1s to see if new series show any promise) and because I have fond memories of Chris Yost's Red Robin (before Fabian Nicieza took over and fucked it all up).<br />
<br />
Scarlet Spider (aka Kaine) is apparently a clone of Spider-Man who turned evil, then died to save Peter, then was resurrected in the recent Spider Island event, and is now trying to decide whether he just wants to enjoy his new life or be a hero. That's a lot of backstory, which can be a bit of a turn off for me when I'm not super-invested in the characters, but Yost seems to deal with it swiftly in the first issue so he can tell a good story going forward. <br />
<br />
I think I'm going to stick with this one for a few more issues. The art is nice and I like the character. The plot revolves around a case of human trafficking, which, is it just me or are super-hero comics obsessed with human trafficking? I feel like it shows up in Batman comics a lot, and lately it was in that awful Huntress mini-series. Anyway. I'm not too thrilled about that aspect of it, but it's not a major turn off or anything.<br />
<br />
I have a feeling this series is going to be short-lived, which seems to be the fate of most solo books for non A-list characters at Marvel these days, but I'll take the risk.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiHWZ56obMGsTCQ28kZnDjTA7NC4uDZYqMU4rdVmmBJZY7sG8_FzpK_7KN_vEtszIXQZZ6OQ1VqIG8BOi8h6FLnd5RZRheoIIFVFjgtiT8TxD4pJLnJwymLxDmFNadxUQ6sZ2KSLAzjrOPP/s1600/IC_ray2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiHWZ56obMGsTCQ28kZnDjTA7NC4uDZYqMU4rdVmmBJZY7sG8_FzpK_7KN_vEtszIXQZZ6OQ1VqIG8BOi8h6FLnd5RZRheoIIFVFjgtiT8TxD4pJLnJwymLxDmFNadxUQ6sZ2KSLAzjrOPP/s320/IC_ray2.jpg" width="213" /></a></div>
<b>The Ray #2 (of 6)</b><br />
<b>Written by Justin Gray and Jimmy Palmiotti; pencils by Jamal Igle; inks by Rich Perrotta; colours by Guy Major; DC</b><br />
<br />
I like the narration in this comic. The way the protagonist is talking directly to the reader. It's a little bit meta, but not in a high-concept kind of way. It reminds me of TV shows, like Malcolm in the Middle or something. (Was that a bad comparison? Sorry.) The point is, it's a good way to give the character a voice and a personality. Which, I'm assuming, most readers need at this point, since they're not familiar with this guy.<br />
<br />
It's not really clear to me how the Ray's light-based powers work. I think he absorbs light and then can use that energy to fly around and do other things, but then it eventually runs out. He can also manipulate how the light reflects off his body, which allows him to change his appearance.<br />
<br />
The plot revolves around his troubles with his girlfriend and her parents, and by the end of the issue the situation has turned into a classic save the girl scenario, after these weird insect-like creatures who talk like Daleks randomly fall from the sky.<br />
<br />
There's nothing really mind-blowing about this, but the writing is pretty sharp. Jamal Igle's art is unremarkable, but not a turn off. I'll give it another issue at least and see where it goes.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiwE7WEz35hfDQ4Sl9z5FI6ksy92i-gw3zUljuTXzqwccOuRAhu1KlJHppqpvMHToqg6r7YtnFo-0lW-lZWVzKeKOe_Tzt3JvyY4C99nPhbBdUYxyVHA7aGPq1SapVBLmMnVLv4VLgNQZnf/s1600/IC_Punisher+7.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiwE7WEz35hfDQ4Sl9z5FI6ksy92i-gw3zUljuTXzqwccOuRAhu1KlJHppqpvMHToqg6r7YtnFo-0lW-lZWVzKeKOe_Tzt3JvyY4C99nPhbBdUYxyVHA7aGPq1SapVBLmMnVLv4VLgNQZnf/s320/IC_Punisher+7.jpg" width="210" /></a></div>
<b>The Punisher #7</b><br />
<b>Written by Greg Rucka; pencils by Michael Lark; inks by Stefano Gaudiano; colours by Matt Hollingworth; Marvel</b><br />
<br />
I just love the fact that Marvel editors have enough faith in what Greg Rucka is doing with this series that they're willing to let him write an entire issue of The Punisher in which The Punisher doesn't appear. It's great pacing for the series as a whole, giving us a little interlude after the carnage in the previous action-packed issue, and it also works perfectly as a stand-alone issue. It even functions as a pretty good jumping-on point for new readers, as the cops investigating the case kind of sum up everything that's happened so far.<br />
<br />
The art team is also fantastic, giving the book a great pulp noir look that matches Rucka's writing style. I really don't care much about The Punisher as a character. I gave this series a try purely because of Rucka. It doesn't disappoint.Yan Basquehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12188814820654379029noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146616530890203634.post-29148131306038542522012-01-26T19:41:00.000-05:002012-01-26T19:41:57.346-05:00I'm reading comics again! // Reviews: Daredevil, Batman, Wonder WomanOperation Catch-up on Comics has officially begun, since I FINALLY <a href="http://yanbasque.tumblr.com/post/16518722551/thoughts-on-a-clash-of-kings">finished reading A Clash of Kings</a> yesterday. This morning on the way to work, I read three comics.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg3UCi9AYvEYJravRKWMi5IUV8fXTC_N1ptSuDp0WWk5OfXdsU5YjjZ-CjfQ9Lh7X_UmR1i_1ANFwp5X_GZaI9gkUEho0bcyRklq7DSYE7I_Br6enF6rwNPTASjxYrXsghjd_jgi-FX3E8Y/s1600/IC_Daredevil8.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg3UCi9AYvEYJravRKWMi5IUV8fXTC_N1ptSuDp0WWk5OfXdsU5YjjZ-CjfQ9Lh7X_UmR1i_1ANFwp5X_GZaI9gkUEho0bcyRklq7DSYE7I_Br6enF6rwNPTASjxYrXsghjd_jgi-FX3E8Y/s200/IC_Daredevil8.jpg" width="131" /></a>
<b>Daredevil #8</b><br />
<b>Written by Mark Waid; art by Kano; colours by Javier Rodriguez; Marvel</b><br />
<br />
This is part 2 of a two-part crossover with Amazing Spider-Man. Waid wrote the ASM issues as well, so the two really flow together as one two-part story, despite the different art team on the books. I've been enjoying Daredevil since this volume began, due as much to Waid's dialogue as to the great art by his collaborators. Here, the art by Kano is nowhere near the level of either Paolo Rivera or Marcus Martin, but Javier Rodriguez's colours help give it a similar feel.<br />
<br />
I was pretty turned off by a few awful examples of stupid-looking sexualized poses for Black Cat, though. That's the kind of shit that takes me right out of a story, unfortunately. To be honest, I'm not a huge fan of the way the character is written either. (SPOILERS:) She's being very flirty with Daredevil throughout this issue, and at the end you find out that she was paid to seduce him in order to steal something from him. Hmm. A female character in a comic book having to resort to her sexuality in order to achieve something. Where have I seen that before? (Um, maybe in a million other sexist comics out there?)<br />
<br />
It's kind of sad, really, because up to this point there wasn't really anything I didn't like about this series. Even the fact that this was a crossover didn't bother me, in part because I happen to be reading both series, but also because it's a crossover that makes sense. I love the way the two characters interact and Mark Waid's Spider-Man is even funnier than Dan Slott's. (Not to knock Dan Slott's writing. I'm enjoying ASM a lot, in spite of the mostly terrible art.) <br />
<br />
So, yeah, that was kind of a bummer, but I enjoyed the story otherwise.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgPLW1kYdRGs2sl0f09RKg286JKhQ00GN1XPcOE2AOHf4rsd4nAMKVbf6IKbm2eSbEIFmFCYCts_BnTo_UO_Adj6ggH9zqy9-6uQyySMXCPdZQJkuKno0_HSjcIywhNBF5N6mK4bNSiJ2xc/s1600/IC_Batman5.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgPLW1kYdRGs2sl0f09RKg286JKhQ00GN1XPcOE2AOHf4rsd4nAMKVbf6IKbm2eSbEIFmFCYCts_BnTo_UO_Adj6ggH9zqy9-6uQyySMXCPdZQJkuKno0_HSjcIywhNBF5N6mK4bNSiJ2xc/s200/IC_Batman5.jpg" width="128" /></a>
<b>Batman #5</b><br />
<b>Written by Scott Snyder; pencils by Greg Capullo; inks by Jonathan Glapion; colours by FCO; DC</b><br />
<br />
I loved Scott Snyder's run on Detective Comics just before the relaunch, but so far his run on Batman hasn't grabbed me to the same level. Is it because of the art? Maybe. Greg Capullo is a fine artist, but he's no Francesco Fancavilla. But mostly I think it's the story. And maybe also the fact that I'm kind of over Bruce Wayne as a character.<br />
<br />
This issue's doing the whole Batman being drugged up and people screwing with his mind thing. It's not the first time we've seen something like this. It ends with a moment that might have been kinda shocking if it weren't on the freaking cover. There's also a neat trick with the layouts changing direction halfway through the book, forcing you to physically turn the book upside down as Batman spirals deeper into the labyrinth. It's kinda neat.<br />
<br />
I'm not hating this. It's a solid Batman comic. I just think I'm at a point where "solid Batman comic" doesn't really cut it anymore. Or maybe it's just a phase. Or maybe the story's about to get really good and blow my mind. We'll see.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh_vXaLpkhKlb0BlAYjhCLadQeSA7NDkze5Tht7zR7cuDjIVXXfpbJEvrh6wx3dkeEPbYZUCsYdeHI2r2D9RMqWc3TucjTJ3XbWjTGqLv-PXrcFkAbR-FnUOklc3Sx7ebey_QwFKxzwFpgg/s1600/IC_wonderwoman5.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh_vXaLpkhKlb0BlAYjhCLadQeSA7NDkze5Tht7zR7cuDjIVXXfpbJEvrh6wx3dkeEPbYZUCsYdeHI2r2D9RMqWc3TucjTJ3XbWjTGqLv-PXrcFkAbR-FnUOklc3Sx7ebey_QwFKxzwFpgg/s200/IC_wonderwoman5.jpg" width="131" /></a>
<b>Wonder Woman #5</b><br />
<b>Written by Brian Azzarello; art by Tony Akins; colours by Matthew Wilson; DC</b><br />
<br />
This was definitely the most underwhelming issue of Wonder Woman since the relaunch. And I don't think it's just because Cliff Chiang didn't draw it, though that certainly has a huge impact. Tony Akins' art is actually quite nice, but Cliff Chiang's been absolutely killing it for the past four issues, so it's a tough sell. I'm also getting really tired of Brian Azzarello's dialogue, I think. I don't know, it just sounds too scripted or something, like it's simultaneously trying too hard and not hard enough. It's hard to put my finger on it, but it's bugging me.<br />
<br />
On the other hand, I kinda like the way this book is turning into a soap opera involving Greek gods. I have no idea why they described this as a horror book. It's totally a soap.Yan Basquehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12188814820654379029noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146616530890203634.post-30191437660508689252012-01-23T19:17:00.002-05:002012-01-24T07:33:51.946-05:00Is It Wednesday Yet? // What's wrong with her spine?Ever since I started following <a href="http://eschergirls.tumblr.com/">this awesome tumblr called Eschergirls</a>, I've been asking myself a couple of questions: How did this kind of art become so popular, and how come nobody has put a stop to it yet?<br />
<br />
If you don't know what I'm talking about, just click the link about. You'll immediately recognize the type of pose I mean. It's the one where a female character twists her body around in ways that are anatomically impossible in order to showcase both her ass and her boobs for the reader.<br />
<br />
I'm serious. I don't understand why that kind of art can be so popular in professionally made comic books by major publishers. The obvious answer is that dumb straight males get turned on by gratuitous shots of tits and asses, and publishers assume that dumb straight males are their primary and most profitable demographic, so they pander to them. I supposed there's a little bit of truth to that. But that answer doesn't really satisfy me, because I actually find it incredibly difficult to be believe that there are that many straight guys who actually find those images sexually appealing.<br />
<br />
Let's put aside all the feminist concerns about whether these images are offensive or harmful for a second and just look at them as pure images devoid of any moral or political charge, designed specifically for the purpose of giving dudes a hard-on. (Yeah, I know this is a weird thought experiment and there's no such thing as amoral/apolitical images, but just go with it for the sake of argument.) Let's go even further and pretend for a moment that straight males are the ONLY people reading comics (which is completely false) and that they DEMAND that these comics include sexy images of hot chicks. (I know. Crazy, right?)<br />
<br />
Okay. If you can somehow accept the over-the-top premise of the previous paragraph, I say that still doesn't justify these awful poses. You're telling me that's the best, most sexy depictions of women these artists can come up with? You're telling me horny straight virgin dudes are happy with that? They wouldn't prefer to see sexy images of women that, oh, I don't know, at least look human?<br />
<br />
I don't understand it at all. I don't understand how artists can produce those images and not be ashamed of them - not because they are overly sexualized but because they are SHITTY ART. I don't understand how editors don't shoot those images down and demand that those pages get redrawn - again, simply on the basis that they don't meet their basic requirements for quality. And I don't understand why readers put up with it.<br />
<br />
*<br />
<br />
Anyway. Here are some new comics I'll be buying this week:<br />
<ul>
<li>American Vampire #23 (Vertigo)</li>
<li>Bulletproof Coffin: Disinterred #1 (of 6) (Image)</li>
</ul>
Wow. It's a very light week. But, oh, man, I'm really excited about that Bulletproof Coffin sequel.Yan Basquehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12188814820654379029noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146616530890203634.post-10129749641925843282012-01-16T22:52:00.002-05:002012-01-17T06:23:52.615-05:00Is It Wednesday Yet? // Huntress, Batgirl, the New 52If you've been paying attention to the comics blogs and news sites (and since you are reading this, I'm going to assume that you have), then you probably know that DC has announced a second wave of "New 52" titles along with other changes to their line, including some cancellations. As you might expect, some of the announcements were rather baffling. It was no big surprise that <i>Hawk & Dove</i> was cancelled, since it was undoubtedly one of DC's worst books and the sales were very low, but how could this possibly lead to artist Rob Liefeld being given not one but THREE books in exchange? It's really hard to understand how DC arrives at those types of decisions. I'm not going to waste any time speculating about it. The good news here is that the books Liefeld will be drawing are not books I would ever in a million years be tempted to read, so it's not like this has any effect on me at all.<br />
<br />
Another bit of news had to do with the character of Huntress, who is currently starring in an eponymous mini-series written by Paul Levitz, and who will soon co-star with Power Girl in a new title by the same writer called <i>World's Finest</i>. What we learned about her is that she's not Helena Bertinelli, the character most fans are familiar with since she's been appearing in DC comics for the past 20 years, but Helena Wayne, her somewhat more obscure pre-Crisis equivalent. (Just read <a href="http://dcwomenkickingass.tumblr.com/post/15946201009/hwhb">this post</a> from DC Women Kicking Ass if you're confused.)<br />
<br />
Why does this matter? As some people have pointed out, in the reboot, all characters have been changed, so this was never going to be the pre-New 52 Huntress, regardless of her name. That may be true, but clearly some characters are changing more than others. Bruce Wayne may technically be a few years younger than he was, and a few details from his early years as Batman may have changed, but if you're reading Scott Snyder's Batman, you know that he's pretty much writing him exactly the same way he would have written him in pre-52 continuity.<br />
<br />
The point is, while there are a few New 52 books that I think are really good, almost all of them would have worked just as well in pre-New 52 continuity: Animal Man, Swamp Thing, Batwoman, Batman, Batman and Robin. The books and characters that have been changed the most - Teen Titans, Birds of Prey, Batgirl, Superman, Justice League - are of no interest to me, because they all feel like inferior versions of their predecessors. (The only exception is Wonder Woman.)<br />
<br />
So now we have Huntress in her own mini-series, wearing essentially the same costume as in her pre-New 52 appearances, drawn gorgeously by Marcus To, going on an international mission to Italy where we find out that she's fluent in Italian. I hope you'll forgive me for assuming that this was Helena Bertinelli. And I was reading it in spite of the fact that the story is a freaking bore and some of it is vaguely racist, simply because this is one of the only female characters I liked from pre-New 52 DCU who survived unchanged and got her own book, so damn right I'm going to support it.<br />
<br />
But, hey! What an idiot! I can't believe I fell for it. Of course she's not who I thought she was. She's Helena Wayne. A character I've never read before and don't really care about.<br />
<br />
Why the change? Is it because she's more interesting if she's linked to Bruce Wayne? Is it because DC is more concerned with appealing to old men who used to read comics and maybe might be interested in reading them again if they feature characters they recognize? <br />
<br />
I don't know. But I lost interest. I'm not even going to finish the mini-series. I'm done with that one.<br />
<br />
*<br />
<br />
Incidentally, I'm also done with Batgirl. I read <a href="http://www.advocate.com/Arts_and_Entertainment/Comics_and_Graphic_Novels/Batgirl_Returns/">this interview with Gail Simone</a> and it annoyed me for a few different reasons I don't even really want to get into. But the short version is that I have no desire to read this book anymore. I was very much against the idea of Barbara Gordon not being Oracle anymore and the only reason I decided to read the new series was to give Gail Simone a chance to prove me wrong. I think five issues is more than a fair chance, and at this point I have read absolutely nothing that in any way justifies what they've done to the character. The story they are telling is not terrible. But it's just not worth what was lost. Not even close. I miss Oracle. I miss Stephanie Brown. And I miss Bryan Q. Miller.<br />
<br />
The worst part is that Gail Simone keeps mentioning that Batgirl is the top-selling female solo book on the market, which I suppose is one way to measure it's success, and I feel like a goddamn tool for having contributed to that success. I bought the first five issues was so that I could judge it for myself and nobody could tell me I was bashing a book I hadn’t even read. Well, I read it, and I hereby judge it to be bad. If I could go back in time and un-buy those five issues, I would.<br />
<br />
*<br />
<br />
Oh, well. Here are some comics I will buy this week:<br />
<ul>
<li>Batman #5</li>
<li>Wonder Woman #5</li>
<li>Amazing Spider-Man #678</li>
<li>Daredevil #8</li>
<li>Superior #7 </li>
</ul>Yan Basquehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12188814820654379029noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146616530890203634.post-10329922455344892442012-01-09T20:35:00.000-05:002012-01-09T20:35:27.208-05:00Is It Wednesday Yet?Oh, man. Working full time. It takes a lot of energy. Not that I'm complaining. I'm happy. I love my job. I love the fact that I have money and benefits and job security. But finding the energy to focus on personal creative projects on evenings and weekends is a real challenge.<br />
<br />
Last week, I had to work on music every night in order to prepare for a show I was playing on Saturday. It was torture, because all I wanted to do was lie down on the couch, eat potato chips, drink beer and watch TV. But I think it paid off in the end. (You can judge for yourself by <a href="http://greatvowelshift.bandcamp.com/">listening to the recording of my set</a>.)<br />
<br />
This week, my plan is to get back into writing about comics. And again, all I want to do is watch episodes of <i>Breaking Bad</i>. I'm thinking maybe I should start writing in the morning. I'm too brain dead in the evening. I'm smarter, more relaxed and more focused in the morning. But I might have to wake up an hour earlier, which would mean going to bed an hour earlier, and I already find it hard to go to bed at 11:00. I don't know...<br />
<br />
Anyway. Comic books! I've been reading some.<br />
<br />
I thought the first issue of Ed Brubaker and Sean Phillips' <b>FATALE</b> was pretty good. Nice blend of crime noir with hints of Lovecraftian horror. Only hints for now, but judging from the cover and the essay on Lovecraft in the back pages, I'm guessing it'll get more explicit soon. Recommended.<br />
<br />
I also caught up on a few series I'd fallen way behind on, such as <b>DAREDEVIL</b> and <b>JOURNEY INTO MYSTERY</b>. I don't really know if I need to say anything about the former, because critic on the internet seems to be praising it, and it's well deserved. A perfect marriage of story and art. Just a joy to read. Meanwhile, JIM suffers from being tied to the Fear Itself event and its aftermath, but is still worth reading because of the awesome characterization of young Loki. The art is also a bit all over the place, depending on the creative team.<br />
<br />
Those are some more or less random choices from the stuff I've been reading mostly on my morning commute to work these past couple of weeks. Going forward, I'm going to try to be more diligent about writing short reviews for individual issues.<br />
<br />
Here's what's on my pull list this week:<br />
<ul>
<li>Batgirl #5 (DC)</li>
<li>Batman and Robin #5 (DC)</li>
<li>Batwoman #5 (DC)</li>
<li>Frankenstein, Agent of SHADE #5 (DC)</li>
<li>The Ray #2 (of 4) (DC)</li>
<li>The Shade #4 (of 12) (DC)</li>
<li>Northlanders #47 (Vertigo)</li>
<li>Amazing Spider-Man #677 (Marvel)</li>
<li>Journey into Mystery #633 (Marvel)</li>
<li>Wolverine and the X-Men #4 (Marvel)</li>
</ul>
That's a lot of books and not a lot of non-DC/Marvel stuff. Sorry about that.<br />
<br />
<b>BATGIRL</b> is teetering on the edge of my tolerance threshold right now. I can't say I'm enjoying it very much and the only reason I'm still buying it is that I feel some kind of obligation to stay on top of things in terms of the whole Oracle/New 52 situation, so that I can form my own opinion about it and potentially write about it later. I've tried to resist saying too much about how I feel about it for now, but sooner or later it's all going to come out. And when it does I'd like it to be an informed and carefully thought-out analysis, not just an emotional outburst.<br />
<br />
Meanwhile, <b>BATMAN AND ROBIN</b><i> </i>is a title that I had decided to completely ignore in the New 52, but I was convinced by Damian's considerable fan-following on Tumblr to give it a try. I bought the first four issues and read them over the holidays and I have to say it's really good. And I realize now just how much I missed Damian. Peter Tomasi has a good understanding of the character and Patrick Gleason's art is very pretty. The only problem I have with the series so far is that the first arc is yet another story about whether it makes sense for Batman to refuse to kill the villains he fights when they keep escaping from Arkham and killing more people. It's been done to death already, so it's hard to take it seriously. I'm also a little bit nervous about <a href="http://kotaku.com/5873710/batmans-kill+crazy-son-runs-away-in-this-batman--robin-5-preview">the preview for this week's issue,</a> which teases a betrayal by Damian/Robin. But on the other hand, come on, that's gotta be a red herring. <br />
<br />
I'm considering skipping <b>FRANKENSTEIN</b> this week, as it's a stupid crossover with OMAC. Although according to Dan DiDio, it's not necessary to read both. *sigh*<br />
<br />
First issue of <b>THE RAY</b> was okay. The first three issues of <b>THE SHADE</b> were fantastic. As were those of <b>WOLVERINE AND THE X-MEN</b>. And <b>AMAZING SPIDER-MAN</b> has been pretty consistently entertaining, despite the mostly shitty art.Yan Basquehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12188814820654379029noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146616530890203634.post-41636531580838597092012-01-04T07:41:00.001-05:002012-01-04T07:41:13.372-05:00Irrelevant Comics in 2012Hey! I'm still here! Things got a little crazy in December, so I had to put IC on hiatus. But now the new year is here and it's time to get back into the groove. <br />
<br />
First, I want to say that I started a new job! This is not totally on topic, but I'm telling you anyway, because it's a big deal to me and it affects everything I do, not only in terms of schedule but also in terms of interests.<br />
<br />
I work in the marketing department for a toy company, so all of a sudden toys are something I think about A LOT. Since I'm a comic book fan, toys have been on my radar for a while, but I've purposely kept them on the periphery of my interests, simply because I didn't want to open up that can of worms and start them. Well, that ship has sailed. Now they're pretty much on my mind all the time.<br />
<br />
Which company do I work for? I'm not going to name it, because I don't want my professional and blogging lives to intersect too much. But we make construction toys (building blocks) and the name doesn't start with "L." That should narrow it down some.<br />
<br />
Anyway. I'm happy and excited. I was in desperate need for a change of pace, and I got one! No more part-time work, no more freelancing, no more working from home. This means I spend more time working, yes, but it also means I feel more motivated than ever, so it's a good trade-off. I also get 45 minutes of public transport commuting twice a day, during which there isn't really anything to do other than read comics (or books).<br />
<br />
I haven't figured out yet how much writing I'm going to be able to get done. I'm still adjusting to my new schedule and settling into a routine. But I have big plans for the year, and they include this blog.<br />
<br />
My first step is going to be to relaunch my weekly column, "Is It Wednesday Yet?", starting next week. The rest is up in the air for now, but rest assure that there will be more.<br />
<br />
Meanwhile, Tumblr continues to be my instant-gratification dumping ground for reblogging images, ranting about gender politics and occasional comic book commentary. I'm going to try to be more diligent about linking back and forth between this place and Tumblr, but if you want you can <a href="http://yanbasque.tumblr.com/">follow me here</a>. And of course <a href="https://twitter.com/#%21/yanbasque/">I'm also on Twitter</a>.<br />
<br />
Stay tuned, faithful readers.Yan Basquehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12188814820654379029noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146616530890203634.post-81347198835701750792011-12-13T12:01:00.000-05:002011-12-13T12:11:19.703-05:00On Barbara Gordon's recovery (preliminary thoughts)(This was originally <a href="http://yanbasque.tumblr.com/post/14170384395/on-barbara-gordons-recovery-preliminary-thoughts">posted on Tumblr</a>, but it seemed substantial enough to repost here as well.)<br />
<br />
I was going to wait until issue #4 comes out tomorrow - or possibly even until issue #7 in March, as <a href="http://dcwomenkickingass.tumblr.com/post/14124331769/bgmarch">based on the solicitation text</a>
it sounds like it’s going to be a big one - before writing anything
about Barbara Gordon’s recovery from her spine injury, but since a lot
of people are already reacting to the <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/life/comics/story/2011-12-12/Batgirl-comics-story/51830078/1">feature and preview in USA Today</a> (and <a href="http://gailsimone.tumblr.com/post/14166161577/this-is-getting-weird">Gail Simone has reacted</a> to some of the reactions), I want to share a few thoughts.<br />
<br />
First, let me just say that this is <b>an ongoing discussion about an ongoing story</b>.
While I understand where the kneejerk reactions from fans are coming
from, I think it’s important to acknowledge that we only have small
pieces of the puzzle. Until the full story of Barbara’s recovery has
been told, we need to be careful about jumping to conclusions based on
the little bits and pieces we’re getting. Gail Simone has stated many
times that Barbara’s recovery is going to be explored in depth over a
long story arc. Let’s just all keep that in mind, because otherwise it
really undermines some of the very valid points that people are trying
to make when the discussion gets derailed into an argument about whether
or not we know the full story.<br />
So here’s what we do know:<br />
<ul>
<li>In the New 52, Barbara was shot by the Joker, spent three years
in a wheelchair, then went to a clinic in South Africa to get some kind
of procedure done to repair her spine, regained the use of her legs and
is now adapting to being Batgirl again and dealing with a little bit of
post-traumatic stress disorder in the process.</li>
<li>“Miracles” have been mentioned a lot in Batgirl, hinting that there
is more to it than “just” a clinic in South Africa. It remains to be
seen how that factors in, though.</li>
</ul>
So it’s a scientific/medical explanation, but the door is still
open for a little bit of comic book fantasy “miracle” to play a part in
it.<br />
<br />
I’ve noticed that a lot of the discussion and controversy around the
issue of Barbara’s recovery has focused on HOW she recovers. This is
what Gail Simone herself has often emphasized in interviews, stating
that treating that story of recovery with respect and a certain amount
of realism was important to her as well as to her readers. (I’m
paraphrasing from memory, so please forgive me if those are not her
exact words.)<br />
<br />
Now I don’t doubt that this aspect of the story is important for some
people, and I’m glad that Gail Simone takes it seriously. But
personally I don’t understand how this has become the central issue in
the discussion. Granted, if we were given some really lazy or awful
explanation for how Barbara recovered, it would probably make things
even worse. But I don’t see how having a realistic and respectful
portrayal of her recovery really makes things “better” for anyone who
was hurt and upset by this change. At best, we can be thankful that
insult is not added to injury.<br />
<br />
As I’ve said in a comment on <a href="https://www.facebook.com/pages/Barbaras-Not-Broken/216306118404228">Barbara’s Not Broken</a>, what it comes down to for me is very simple: There used to be Oracle; now there isn’t.<br />
<br />
The important question which has so far been left unanswered (and is
not even being asked, for the most part) is this one: What was Barbara
Gordon up to during the three years she spent in the wheelchair? So far,
there has been absolutely no mention of there having ever been an
Oracle in the New 52 continuity. There is not evidence that Barbara was
involved in crime-fighting in any capacity during those three years.
Now, I’m sure we’re going to eventually find out more about what
happened during that time, but it’s looking increasingly likely that
Oracle will not be part of that story.<br />
And for me, that is what’s upsetting. That is the real loss that I
feel when I think about the fact that Barbara Gordon is back in the
Batgirl costume. There used to be a character in DC Comics <b>who was both disabled and a hero. Simultaneously!</b> Now we have a character who was once a hero, then was disabled, and now is a hero again.<br />
<br />
When we first found out that Barbara would be Batgirl in the New 52,
one of the fears people had was that her whole history of having been
disabled would be wiped out of continuity. (And that the almighty Alan
Moore’s <i>Killing Joke</i> would be wiped out of continuity in the
process.) But this, DC assured us, would not be the case. We were told
this would be a story of recovery and survival and that everybody felt
it was important to keep the disability in continuity.<br />
<br />
But what DC seems to have missed is that it wasn’t just the fact that
Barbara was in a wheelchair that made her such an important and
inspiring hero for a lot of people - it was the fact that she was also a
hero. Keeping the disability but removing the heroic part of it seems
even more problematic to me than simply wiping it out of continuity.<br />
<br />
And that’s what I’m worried about and what I’m waiting to find out about as I continue to read Gail Simone’s <i>Batgirl</i>
series. Sure, the story of how Barbara recovered is interesting. But
there are other (in my opinion more important) questions that I hope
will be answered in the story.Yan Basquehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12188814820654379029noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146616530890203634.post-86683539310204449032011-12-09T12:57:00.001-05:002011-12-09T13:08:58.348-05:00Flashmob Fridays, tumblr, and other stuffI know this blog has been dormant for the past few weeks, but that doesn't mean I haven't been reading comics, thinking about comics, and even writing about comics. <br />
<br />
First of all, check out the new <a href="http://flashmobfridays.blogspot.com/">Flashmob Fridays blog</a>, maintained by the guys from <a href="http://troublewithcomics.com/">Trouble with Comics</a>. And yes, I am one of the regular contributing writers! The concept is simple: each week, a bunch of us submit reviews for the same book, and they all get compiled on Friday so you can compare the different reactions and opinions. We're working on a way to follow that up with some discussion.<br />
<br />
The blog launched last week with a <a href="http://flashmobfridays.blogspot.com/2011/12/daredevil-6.html">review of Daredevil #6</a>, for which I unfortunately wasn't able to make the deadline. But I did participate this week with <a href="http://flashmobfridays.blogspot.com/2011/12/kevin-keller-2.html">my take on Kevin Keller #2</a>. Check it out.<br />
<br />
In other news, I've <a href="http://yanbasque.tumblr.com/">started posting on Tumblr again</a>. I really needed a place where I could post more spontaneously and about a broader range of topics than this blog, and Tumblr seemed like the best platform for that. If you decide to follow me there (and you really should), you'll see a mix of comics art, fan art, introspective autobiographical posts, and plenty of commentary on issues like feminism, sexual identity, politics, etc.<br />
<br />
You can also of course <a href="https://twitter.com/#%21/yanbasque/">follow me on Twitter</a>.<br />
<br />
And if you missed it completely here on this blog, be sure to check out last month's <a href="http://irrelevantcomics.blogspot.com/2011/11/interview-with-nathan-fairbairn.html">interview with Nathan Fairbairn</a>.<br />
<br />
I'm going through some pretty big life changes right now, including a new job and a new schedule. I hope to start posting here regularly in the new year. Don't give up. <i>Irrelevant Comics</i> will rise again. And thanks for reading.Yan Basquehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12188814820654379029noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146616530890203634.post-39123843376911180052011-11-07T22:52:00.002-05:002011-11-07T23:06:45.810-05:00Interview with Nathan Fairbairn<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgxflK8RpK5lKeKLmuxWabHNp5EqL5lHYCw6_rlFsNErdmOj6E6SRw30m38YDPSAE7HavttrlEOxKHJNeVA9XtRVjXtPZ9nwyrMeDNJFptnhiQ0PLW_KyEUAbdx_UOpL-QD5KPcrVAF5l5n/s1600/batman-inc-7.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgxflK8RpK5lKeKLmuxWabHNp5EqL5lHYCw6_rlFsNErdmOj6E6SRw30m38YDPSAE7HavttrlEOxKHJNeVA9XtRVjXtPZ9nwyrMeDNJFptnhiQ0PLW_KyEUAbdx_UOpL-QD5KPcrVAF5l5n/s320/batman-inc-7.jpg" width="208" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Batman Inc #7</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
When I started reading comic books (just a few years ago) I mostly paid attention to stories. Writers were the first names in the credits I started recognizing. But over time, my attention shifted more and more toward the art, to the point where the artist is usually a bigger determining factor in what I decide to buy than the writer. (Although, obviously, the best comics are the ones that combine great writing and great art.) As my appreciation of the art and craft of making comics deepened, I also started to realize that a big part of what defines the art that I like is the way it is coloured.<br />
<br />
Colourists are still largely unsung heroes, not always recognized as part of the creative team. But their work has a huge impact on my enjoyment of the comics I read. I got really excited when I started to notice that some books by different artists had a distinct quality that I liked because they shared the same colourist. This was what prompted me to read the credits more carefully and make an effort to remember the names of the colourists whose work I liked.<br />
<br />
One of those names I started noticing was Nathan Fairbairn. Recently, I was particularly impressed by his work on <i>Swamp Thing</i> (colouring Yanick Paquette's art) and <i>Mystic</i> (colouring David and Alvaro Lopez's art), two very different books with completely different tones, art styles and colour palettes, and yet both visually striking.<br />
<br />
I wanted to find out more about Nathan's approach to colouring, so I reached out to him and he graciously agreed to answer a few questions. As it turns out Nathan is not just a talented artist, but also an eloquent writer with some very interesting things to say about his craft. Read on for the interview.<br />
<br />
[Note about spelling: I use Canadian English spelling ("colour") for this blog, but I opted to keep Nathan's use of the US English ("color") since that's how he submitted his answers, hence the inconsistent spelling in this post.]<br />
<br />
<b>Irrelevant Comics: Aside from the obvious task of adding colour, how would you define the colourist's role in the production line of comics? How do colours contribute to the storytelling?</b><br />
<br />
Nathan Fairbairn: A colorist has three main concerns: mood, depth, and focus. Mood is pretty simple: the palette needs to suit the tone of the story/art/genre. Depth is also pretty self-explanatory and mostly involves using lighting and atmospheric perspective to break up the planes of the art and generally add to the illusion of volume and third dimension. Focus is perhaps the most important aspect of the job. As a colorist, it's my responsibility to help the writer and artist draw the reader's eye to the crucial element in any given panel or page by playing with contrast of value, hue and saturation.<br />
<br />
<b>IC: In a lot of mainstream comics, the colours tend to be "invisible," in the sense that you don't really notice them unless they are strikingly bad. Is that a deliberate choice? Are colourists encouraged to stick to the "house style"? Do you ever wish colourists would make bolder choices or experiment more? </b><br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjyVoQZLCObFr7dmtdktneNhrQ8v8tOQBgZ9TnKOvKnfYaHdpBBOQ0SzkPyE9x7LsBLK9RNnzgsKIDB-0bsBQLSNBjfaZyLdbIrIq6cJDs9_k2ScGVFK2os6bNUQz890ME60hu8d34edjTz/s1600/swamp-thing-2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjyVoQZLCObFr7dmtdktneNhrQ8v8tOQBgZ9TnKOvKnfYaHdpBBOQ0SzkPyE9x7LsBLK9RNnzgsKIDB-0bsBQLSNBjfaZyLdbIrIq6cJDs9_k2ScGVFK2os6bNUQz890ME60hu8d34edjTz/s320/swamp-thing-2.jpg" width="208" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Swamp Thing #2</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
I actually disagree with the premise that colors are ever "invisible." <br />
<br />
In addition to coloring comics, I also play the bass. Now, if you ask the average casual listener what they think of a bass line in any given song, you might get a shrug of the shoulders in response, but that doesn't mean the bass line is inaudible or unnecessary for the listener's enjoyment of the song. It just means that the listener is either incapable of distinguishing the bass from the other instrumentation, or that they're so focused on the melodies of the vocals that their awareness of the accompanying music is almost subconscious. This is why when you go to a live show and a band starts to play one of their hits, you often get two waves of recognition and appreciation: those who pay attention to the music respond with applause after the first notes or bars are played, and then a few moments later, those who only pay attention to the vocals start applauding when the first words are sung. <br />
<br />
I think that it's kind of the same thing with comics and coloring. Some readers (usually those who are as interested in the craft as they are in the stories being told) are as keenly attuned to the color in a comic as they are to the pencils, inks, or lettering, and for them, it's never invisible. Like bass players, colorists can be boring, uninterested, lazy, technically incompetent, brilliant, astonishing, masterful, prosaic, formulaic, daring or just downright shitty. Like with any art form, there's a full range of practitioners. <br />
<br />
In answer to your question about a house style, I wouldn't say there is one (except, obviously within color studios such as HiFi). I <i>would</i> say that there are definitely those colorists out there who have no interest whatsoever in reinventing the wheel. And usually they're <i>right</i> to do so. There's a time and a place, you know? You don't try to cram a funk bass line into a Bruce Springsteen song. Similarly, if you're coloring a George Perez drawing of Captain America throwing his shield, don't get cute about it, right? Conventional stories require conventional art require conventional colors, whereas unconventional stories require unconventional art require unconventional colors.<br />
<br />
<b>IC: Part of a colourist's work is very technical. For example, you need a good knowledge of anatomy and lighting when adding texture and shadows to a character's face. But there's also an element of design to the work, in terms of how the colours match on the page and giving the book a distinct look and feel. How important is design for you? </b><br />
<br />
Any art form requires a considerable amount of technical knowledge and coloring is no different. Without that foundation, no amount of raw talent is going to sustain you or your career. Which works out nicely for me, since I don't actually consider myself super talented artistically. I just work hard and think about what I'm doing a <i>lot.</i> I always have a reason for why I'm doing what I'm doing. You point to any color on a page and I can articulate to you why I chose it. There's very little that is free or spontaneous about my work. It's all very deliberate.<br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjHhOEJUBt09jVemn32PtRptE3DoUEe6AsaK37La5QPc2acEKojK_jZTfzpXOwn4G4Qen3iAxYNX1Jy4TfoNQWqkMi7c1d_6sJq3Tce1lI4lK8hyphenhyphenucQY2xaOunOK9hegPe53NEWvP1OmrR3/s1600/hawkeyemockingbird-01.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjHhOEJUBt09jVemn32PtRptE3DoUEe6AsaK37La5QPc2acEKojK_jZTfzpXOwn4G4Qen3iAxYNX1Jy4TfoNQWqkMi7c1d_6sJq3Tce1lI4lK8hyphenhyphenucQY2xaOunOK9hegPe53NEWvP1OmrR3/s320/hawkeyemockingbird-01.jpg" width="210" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Hawkeye & Mockingbird #1</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
As for design, it's extremely important to my work. When approaching the colors of a single page, it is important that the reader's eye moves around within a panel and then on to the next in the way that I want, and knowledge of basic principles of design and composition is key to achieving this. Obviously, it's best if the penciller also has this in mind right from the outset, and I can just enhance the design that's already there, rather than try to impose a design through color that doesn't already exist. Furthermore, the initial and overall color design of an entire project is an incredibly important phase of my work. The look and feel of my work is clearly going to be directed by the line art on the page, but I also want to suit my color work to the <i>story</i> being told, which is why my work with the same collaborators often varies from book to book. If you look at my work just with Yanick Paquette, you'll see how my palette and overall rendering style changes depending on the project. <i>Batman Inc</i> is a bright and saturated pop art world, whereas <i>Weapon X</i> is duller and grittier, slightly washed out at times even, and <i>Swamp Thing</i> is vibrant, but dark, if that makes sense. Better yet, if you look at my work with David and Alvaro Lopez on <i>Hawkeye & Mockingbird</i> and on <i>Mystic,</i> the difference between the overall look of the books is massive. David didn't really draw <i>Mystic</i> much differently than he did <i>H&M, </i>but I decided I wanted to color the whole mini like it were a Disney movie. It took a bit of convincing, but the team all had great faith in me and I think I was able to pull it off almost exactly as I'd hoped. <br />
<br />
<b>IC: I was really impressed by your recent work on <i>Swamp Thing</i> and <i>Mystic</i>. Not only do both books look gorgeous, but they're also very different styles and colour palettes. Can you talk a little bit about how you approached each project? Did you discuss the colours with the artists or writers or editors, or were your choices mostly based on your own response to the art? </b><br />
<br />
I rarely discuss the colour design of a book or the specific page-to-page, panel-to-panel color choices with the writer before I get to work. I'm not opposed to it; it just rarely happens. Sometimes there is a specific note in the script to the colorist and sometimes the editor has some ideas for me before I get started, and occasionally the artist has some requests/preferences that he makes known up front, but usually my choices are just a careful response to what's written in the script and drawn on the page. If I have any concerns, I ask the team, but generally I just go for it. Comics are usually done on such a tight schedule there's really no time to color by committee. <br />
<br />
<b>IC: Without providing an in-depth tutorial, can you give us a quick step-by-step breakdown of your technique? </b><br />
<br />
All of my work is done in Photoshop. The first step is always to drop in the flat colors on a layer beneath the line art. I spend a fair amount of time on this step, making sure that all my choices are right. This is where the real thinking is done, when all the design and storytelling issues are figured out. After that comes the lighting and rendering of the scene and figures, followed last by whatever special effects are required on top of the lines and color (glows and explosions and the like). Oh, and sometimes there's a layer for color holds, which is when you go in and actually color the inks themselves, as I did on <i>Mystic.</i> You've got to know your tools, obviously, but there's really not much technical knowledge required. I could teach you everything you need to know about Photoshop to do my job in a day. Someone once asked me at a con how I colored a particular page in such a way that it was clear he knew a lot about Photoshop and next to nothing about art. I had my laptop with me, so I opened up the file and showed it to him. It was very satisfying to see his face as he realized there were only 3 layers: the colors, the lines above that, and a layer with a few glows above that. In other words, no fancy tricks: I just colored the bloody thing.<br />
<br />
<b>IC: Where did you learn the craft and technique of colouring? Anybody can pick up a pen or pencil and start drawing at home but colouring is mostly done by computer. How does an aspiring colourist start to learn the basics?</b><br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjuBx-VH34wL5PchlJ8QMcLQGQlGZbTeKs7AY-Y688khiut7fXL88v1EuHKGemLz_9G3lESLBjk32bsY-9ublRzvmAYtAtI2vC11G6SHVjn9bBjJ46AA-u1xIiMhB2ooETukWCAcQrg_e2I/s1600/mystic-1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjuBx-VH34wL5PchlJ8QMcLQGQlGZbTeKs7AY-Y688khiut7fXL88v1EuHKGemLz_9G3lESLBjk32bsY-9ublRzvmAYtAtI2vC11G6SHVjn9bBjJ46AA-u1xIiMhB2ooETukWCAcQrg_e2I/s320/mystic-1.jpg" width="210" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Mystic #1</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Well, get your hands on Photoshop, obviously. There are free trial versions, and cheaper editions for students available. Then buy some books, such as <i>Color Theory,</i> by Jose Parammon, and the <i>DC Guide to Coloring and Lettering,</i> by Mark Chiarello. Get your hands on some line art online and start practicing every minute you can. Take life drawing classes and design classes if possible. Pay attention to color design on the page, canvas and screen whenever you see it. Take up traditional painting. And for God's sake, get impartial feedback. Go to cons and get your samples in front of professionals. Put your work on art forums and really listen to what people are saying. Check out gutterzombie.com, a forum specifically for colorists. It was an <i>invaluable</i> resource in my own studies. Above all, just do the work and enjoy the process.<br />
<br />
Oh, and if you want to color comics, then color <i>comics.</i> I'm amazed by the number of wannabe colorists I encounter who don't have a single page of sequential art in their portfolio, just page after page <i>after page</i> of pinups and covers. I don't keep count, but I'd guess I've colored 2,000 or more pages of sequential art in my career and maybe 60 or so pinups and covers. The job is telling stories, not making pretty pictures.<br />
<br />
<b>IC: Colourists rarely enjoy the same kind of name recognition that writers or artists do. How important do you think Marvel's policy of including the colourist's name on the cover is? Does it bother you that not all companies do the same thing? Where do you think that reluctance comes from?</b><br />
<br />
It's great that Marvel gives colorists the credit that they are due and a share in the incentives/royalties program that writers, pencilers and inkers participate in. They've been doing so ever since I started working for them in 2007, and frankly I never gave it much thought. It just seemed obvious to me to include the colorist as part of the creative team. So when I started working for DC recently, yeah, I was pretty disappointed to find that they don't consider colorists to be members of the creative team, but rather the production team, and so give the colorist neither cover credit nor royalties. From what I understand, it's an institutional holdover from the very early days of the company when comics coloring was pretty rudimentary, restricted to a basic palette of like 27 colors, and no one cared if the sky was yellow, the road green and the buildings pink, as long as the Flash was red. Back then, it honestly didn't matter who colored a book -- it would always look much the same (i.e. terrible). Pencilers and inkers were the show; colorists were just the stagehands. Nowadays, the colorist has a profound influence on the finished product, in many cases moreso than do inkers, and should be recognized accordingly. It drives me nuts when a book or series is nominated for an Eisner and the entire creative team, including the colorist, isn't included. Dave McCaig, for example, despite being the sole colorist on several Eisner-award-winning books, such as <i>American Vampire</i> and <i>The Other Side</i>, is somehow not an Eisner Award winner. It's a scandal.<br />
<br />
<b>IC: When you started your career in comics, was your goal always to work as a colourist, or did you first want to be an illustrator? If the latter, then is that still something you aspire to, or did you discover that colouring was your true calling?</b><br />
<br />
I have some fairly lofty ambitions in the comics medium. In addition to my training in art, I studied English Lit and Creative Writing at university and worked as a journalist, editor, and English teacher before becoming a full-time freelance colorist, so it may not be surprising to hear that I want to write comics as well as draw and color them. Heck, I'm even interested in the art of lettering. In music, I have a lot of respect for a guy like Dave Grohl, who started out his career as a drummer -- a role player -- on someone else's project and today is a respected and successful singer/songwriter/guitarist/frontman of his own band who is also considered a dream collaborator as a drummer on other musicians' projects. In 10 years, I hope to be producing my own graphic novels, writing an ongoing series or two for other artists, and coloring the occasional project by artists I admire.<br />
<br />
<i>Nathan Fairbairn's <a href="http://www.nathanfairbairn.com/">website is here</a>. You can also <a href="https://twitter.com/#%21/nathanfairbairn">follow him on Twitter</a>.</i>Yan Basquehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12188814820654379029noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146616530890203634.post-30994235245518807982011-11-07T19:36:00.000-05:002011-11-07T19:42:14.799-05:00Five random thoughts on Buffy (S1, ep 1-8)Yes. I am watching <i>Buffy the Vampire Slayer</i> for the first time. No, it's not a comic book. But Joss Whedon has written comic books. And even Buffy itself turns into a comic book after it stops airing (if I understand that correctly), so please bear with me.<br />
<br />
Here are 5 random thoughts after watching the first 8 episodes of the first season. I will post more thoughts as they come to me over the next several weeks as I make my way through this cult TV show, 15 years too late.<br />
<br />
1. What is it with 20-somethings playing teenagers on American TV? I think it's mostly a logistical thing having something to do with child labour laws and maybe unions, but nevertheless, it's weird to me that so many people are willing to suspend disbelief and watch all these shows with very obviously adult actors pretending to be kids. Considering how this is a bit of a pet peeve of mine, I was surprised how easy it was to ignore with this show. I think that says something about how well written the characters are, that they can be convincingly read as teenagers despite looking so much older.<br />
<br />
2. OMG, the 1990s. Especially evident at "The Bronze," the nightclub that looks like a warehouse and lets teenagers in indiscriminately and where they apparently have a different live band playing every night. Imagine if those places had actually existed in the 1990s! How much more exciting my teenage life would have been. It's also hilarious when this kind of thing happens randomly:<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjNULzrdV0YQ8OS2ti6seyFZvZElxA0NNhyphenhyphen5PzU5UcDNYGfXqvNt7F2QfkrUQzLox_Af7tT9zfpf-ys_IafJ0SOwbcEE0uqsM_1pLSO_7xvl4dLvXnsoHIEE9uI_o44DJC-JxmgPG6JdIeZ/s1600/2011-11-07+06.50.51+pm.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="300" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjNULzrdV0YQ8OS2ti6seyFZvZElxA0NNhyphenhyphen5PzU5UcDNYGfXqvNt7F2QfkrUQzLox_Af7tT9zfpf-ys_IafJ0SOwbcEE0uqsM_1pLSO_7xvl4dLvXnsoHIEE9uI_o44DJC-JxmgPG6JdIeZ/s400/2011-11-07+06.50.51+pm.png" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Grunge!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
3. Speaking of fashion accessories, Giles' ties are driving me insane! Every time the character appears onscreen, all I can focus on is how crooked his tie knots are. I know it's part of his character, this mix of stuffiness and perpetual "disheveledness," but there's something too calculated about the fact that his ties are NEVER straight. I can tell that's exactly how the wardrobe department wanted it to look and it's just distracting to me. (I know. I'm a little bit crazy. But I'm very passionate about ties and tie knots.)<br />
<br />
4. The lack of diversity in the casting took me by surprise. One
of the most talked about aspect of the show is the real effort to
subvert traditional gender stereotypes (and I think the praise is well
deserved), so I think because of that I expected a similar attention to ethnic representation. Off the top of my head, I can only think of two
non-white characters so far: one black bouncer at The Bronze who becomes vampire food, and one black student who had a few lines of dialogue in one scene, also at The Bronze, in a different episode.<br />
<br />
I wonder if this is also a byproduct of the 1990s and I've just forgotten how much less diverse TV was back then. (I know, it's not like ethnic diversity is great nowadays, but it's definitely getting better, slowly but surely.) I'm also curious whether this will improve in later seasons or if it remains the status quo throughout. It's too early for me to really draw any conclusions, but it makes me slightly uncomfortable, especially when combined with the constant flirting with "exoticisation" of the Other. In the episode "The Pack," for example, the evil of the week the white heroes are fighting against comes from some tribe in Africa (via the imported hyenas at the zoo). It's definitely something I will continue to think about while I watch the rest of the show.<br />
<br />
5. So far, each of the three main teen characters has had a brief romantic fling that ended more or less tragically: Xander with the praying mantis teacher, Willow with the Malcolm/Moloch, and Buffy with Angel (although obviously this one isn't over yet). I was definitely aware of this during the Moloch episode ("I, Robot... You, Jane") and was both surprised and delighted that the writers acknowledged this explicitly at the end of the episode. It was a good example of how the show gets away with a lot of clichés by sort of winking at the audience. It's not quite meta, but it's just self-aware enough to keep things interesting.Yan Basquehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12188814820654379029noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146616530890203634.post-59538632807218549192011-10-20T21:15:00.002-04:002011-10-20T21:15:52.605-04:00Books I read: Batgirl, Batwoman, Frankenstein, Shade, Batman, Wonder WomanI know I promised to feature some non-DC/Marve comics on this blog this month, but you know how it is. Life gets in the way. But I will get to them eventually. Aside from my regular pull list, I've also gotten a few graphic novels of interest lately: Nate Powell's Any Empire, Craig Thompson's Habibi, and Daniel Clowes' Death-Ray. I hope to write about all of them, so thanks for your patience.<br />
<br />
Meanwhile, here are some very quick thoughts on the DC books I read the past couple of weeks.<br />
<br />
<b>Batgirl #2</b><br />
<b>Written by Gail Simone, pencils by Ardian Syaf, inks by Vincente Cifuentes; colours by Ulises Arreola; DC.</b><br />
<br />
I find myself disliking the art in this book a lot more than I ever expected to. Ardian Syaf's action scenes are confusing and his faces are inconsistent and weird. And the colours by Ulises Arreola are positively garish. Storywise, we find out what the villain's deal is and it's a bit more complicated than what I was expecting. I'm not really sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing. I feel like it's too soon for me to really care about this villain's backstory and I wish Gail Simone had waited a bit longer before giving us that information. Meanwhile, she continues to tease about the "miraculous" way Barbara was cured, which is fine for now, but I hope it doesn't drag on for too much longer. Bottom line is I'm still very curious about where all this is going, but not completely sold on it either. I want to give Gail Simone a fair chance, though, so that's as far as I'll go with my analysis for now.<br />
<br />
<b>Batwoman #1 and 2</b><br />
<b>Written by J.H. Williams III and W. Haden Blackman; art by J. H. Williams III; colours by Dave Stewart; DC.</b><br />
<br />
The first issue sold out before I could get my hands on it last month, so I grabbed the second printing last week along with the second issue. J.H. Williams doesn't disappoint. He delivers exactly the kind of spectacular art that everyone was expecting, with incredibly complex and ultra-stylized layouts. As impressive and beautiful as it is, though, I find it a little bit exhausting. I'm a big fan of simple, elegant design and grid layouts, and sometimes I find myself wishing that J.H. Williams would show a little bit more restraint. I'm a little bit sick of those double-page spread layouts with the panels forming a giant bat symbol, which we've seen him use in Elegy as well as in the Batman stuff he did with Grant Morrison. I feel like there's only so many times you can pull that off before it starts to feel like a gimmick, and Williams is getting awfully close to that limit. I've also read at least a couple of comments from people saying they're finding the unexplained whiteness of Kate Kane's skin kind of distracting, and I tend to agree. It was fine as a stylistic choice at first, but now I keep asking myself what is wrong with that woman's skin and why doesn't she spend more time in the sun?<br />
<br />
Still, I'm being critical here, but that doesn't mean I don't get any pleasure out of this beautiful art. Besides, all these pretty pictures would feel more superfluous if we didn't get some good stories to support them, and so far I'm liking what Williams and Blackman are doing with the characters. It might not be on the level of Greg Rucka's excellent and defining run writing the character, but it's good enough to keep my interest. Also, the fact that Amy Reeder is going to be drawing the next arc gives me something to look forward to. It's going to be a nice change of pace.<br />
<b><br /></b><br />
<b>Frankenstein: Agent of S.H.A.D.E. #2</b><br />
<b>Written by Jeff Lemire; art by Alberto Ponticelli; colours by Jose Villarubia; DC.</b><br />
<br />
I enjoyed this issue a whole lot more than the first one, and I think this title might turn out to be one of my favourites of the New 52 after all. Lotta fun, good art, good colours. What's not to like?<br />
<b><br /></b><br />
<b>The Shade #1</b><br />
<b>Written by James Robinson; art by Cully Hamner; colours by Dave McCraig; DC.</b><br />
<br />
This is going to be a 12-issue mini-series, with each arc by a different artist. If you've read James Robinson's seminal Starman run (or even just part of it, as I have), then you know how awesome this character can be. I really enjoyed this first issue, despite the appearance of one of my all-time least favourite villains in the last few pages. And Cully Hamner's art - wow! This just made me want to rush out and buy more of his books. (PS: What do you recommend?)<br />
<b><br /></b><br />
<b>Batman #2</b><br />
<b>Written by Scott Snyder; pencils by Greg Capullo; inks by Jonathan Glapion; colours by FCO; DC.</b><br />
<br />
This is good. Of course it's good. What else would you expect from a Batman comic written by Scott Snyder? There isn't really anything about the story that's blowing my mind yet, but I can tell that Snyder is slowly putting all the pieces in place and when the shit hits the fan, our minds are going to suitably blown. Greg Capullo's art, which I wasn't all that thrilled with at first, is starting to grow on me. It still kind of seems like a weird fit for this book, but it's good.<br />
<b><br /></b><br />
<b>Wonder Woman #2</b><br />
<b>Written by Brian Azzarello; art by Cliff Chiang; colours by Matthew Wilson; DC.</b><br />
<br />
And this is my favourite book of the batch this time around. As unconvinced as I am about the idea of Zeus being Wonder Woman's father, I have to admit that so far it definitely looks like Brian Azzarello knows what he's doing and he's got a good story to tell, so let's wait and see what he does with it. Cliff Chiang's art is juts phenomenal. I don't know what else to say. This book is just full of awesome, and right now it's competing with Swamp Thing for the #1 spot in my heart out of this relaunch.Yan Basquehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12188814820654379029noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146616530890203634.post-40184807386654999502011-10-09T09:55:00.000-04:002011-10-09T10:01:28.562-04:00About that kick in Huntress #1I've seen a few reviews of Huntress #1 take issue with some of Marcus To's art, and in particular with one panel that shows Helena's body twisting in ways not humanly possible to kick one of the bad guys in the face. This is the offending panel:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiti_Xx6ToSawQO0uDOcEbG9XdUslxzysuK24UGy8bFrf-eubHeFrdu3CO-3K3Kovw8-WQ3jCoE5UyV0awTtnCPEz3nwy1F5VzCZjruiCjKwE_tf0t3Ed80rr8eP_ZAD4n1ZuT3e2-4ro3c/s1600/Huntress_01_kick.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiti_Xx6ToSawQO0uDOcEbG9XdUslxzysuK24UGy8bFrf-eubHeFrdu3CO-3K3Kovw8-WQ3jCoE5UyV0awTtnCPEz3nwy1F5VzCZjruiCjKwE_tf0t3Ed80rr8eP_ZAD4n1ZuT3e2-4ro3c/s640/Huntress_01_kick.jpg" width="281" /></a></div>
<br />
Marcus To takes the criticism seriously and has <a href="http://marcusto.tumblr.com/post/11116281057/so-ign-gave-me-a-rough-review-today-on-my-art">responded on his Tumblr</a> by pointing to a scene in a Tony Jaa movie that inspired the move and a picture of a gymnast standing in a similar position, while also acknowledging that he did screw up some of the details, like the orientation of the foot.<br />
<br />
All of which is cool, but the thing is, I don't really care. This was one of my favourite panels in the book. It made me laugh out loud, not because I thought it was ridiculous but because I thought it was delightfully absurd in the way that superhero comics inherently are (or should be). These are the kinds of panels that automatically put a smile on my face. Criticizing it for being unrealistic sucks all the joy out of it.<br />
<br />
I appreciate some level of realism in my comics. Artists that play fast and loose with anatomy and perspective sometimes bother me (for example, <a href="http://deathtotheuniverse.blogspot.com/2011/09/idiots-dc-relaunch-notes.html">Jim Lee's art in Justice League #1</a>). But I also want comics to be fun and I want these heroes to pull off move that nobody else can pull off. And if that means a little bit of cheating from time to time, I'm perfectly fine with that.<br />
<br />
It seems like a strange thing to pick on when readers and reviewers seem to fully accept anatomically impossible female bodies with tiny waistlines, twisted so that their boobs AND their ass are pointed at the reader, in high heels and an unzipped suit, supposedly being "empowered." At least To's art is respectful of the character. The above panel is meant to show how incredibly skilled Helena is. It doesn't emphasize her crotch or her boobs. There's nothing objectifying about it.<br />
<br />
In my opinion Marcus To is one of the best artists working for DC right now. His layouts are simple and elegant. His lines are super-clean. He can make any costume look great. He never goes for cheesecake. He's always on time and never needs fill-in artists to finish his pages. Sure, there's room for improvement (I find he has a limited range in body types and faces, for example) but his strengths as an artist far outweigh his weaknesses.Yan Basquehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12188814820654379029noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146616530890203634.post-44044149310116331862011-10-06T00:38:00.000-04:002011-10-06T00:38:25.074-04:00Books I read: Action Comics, Animal Man, Huntress, Swamp ThingYes, I do plan on spending some time this month reviewing some of the non-DC/Marvel comics on my pull list. But that doesn't mean I stop covering the New 52. Here are some quick thoughts on the new issues I read this week.<br />
<br />
<b>Action Comics #2</b><br />
<b>Written by Grant Morrison; pencils by Rags Morales and Brent Anderson; inks by Rick Bryant and Brent Anderson; colours by Brad Anderson; DC </b>
<br />
<br />
One of my biggest concerns with DC's relaunch is that their commitment to shipping all the books on time will lead to more unsolicited fill-in artists. I hate unsolicited fill-in artists with the passion of a thousand suns. I understand that artists need a break from time to time. But I think how much work an artist can handle should be planned into the schedule. Either alternate between two art teams, or plan for guest artists between story arcs. It's simply not acceptable to announce a book with one creative team and then ship it with a different (and most of the time inferior) creative team.<br />
<br />
Consistency of art is really important to me. I have a feeling that I'm in the minority, but whatever. As a consumer, I'm just not willing to keep supporting books that constantly disappoint me in that department. I've learned my lesson from DC in recent months, and one of the conditions I set for myself when I decided to try out some of these New 52 issues was that the moment an unsolicited fill-in artist would appear in a book, that book would get dropped from my pull list.<br />
<br />
Well, ladies and gentlemen, Action Comics made it through one-and-a-half issue before Rags Morales needed some help. The art in the second issue is wildly inconsistent. I'm assuming that the pages not drawn by Morales are the ones that feature Lois Lane. That would certainly explain why she looks like a completely different character in every panel she appears in.<br />
<br />
The patch-up art job is already enough for me to stop buying this book. But there's another reason. This book costs $3.99. If I remember correctly, the justification for the extra dollar on some of the New 52 books (despite DC's much publicized "holding the line" campaign pre-September and their promises to stick to $2.99 till the end of the year) was that it's a longer than the standard 20 pages we get in other books. Well, I counted the story pages in this issue and there are 20. The rest are bonus material, ads and a preview for some Batman graphic novel. So where's my extra dollar going? Hint: It's not "bonus" material if I have to pay extra for it.<br />
<br />
All this ranting and I haven't even talked about the content yet. Is this a terrible comic? No. It's an average comic book that I already wasn't that stoked on after the first issue, but I figured I would give it a chance. I did. And now it's over. I will not be buying issue #3.<br />
<br />
<b>Animal Man #2</b><br />
<b>Written by Jeff Lemire; art by Travel Foreman; colours by Lovern Kindzierski; DC</b><br />
<br />
I didn't enjoy this issue quite as much as I enjoyed the first one. I think it's because of the way Maxine feels more like a plot device than a character. I find it a little bit of a cop out that Buddy doesn't really have to do any work to figure out what is going on. All he has to do is listen to his daughter explain everything to him and guide him to this magical world nobody knew existed just 24 hours earlier. It's just awfully convenient that Maxine has all the answers.<br />
<br />
In spite of that, I did enjoy the issue. I still think the art is visually striking and original. I think those who weren't sold on the art in the first issue will probably have even more problems with it in this one, but I actually find it refreshing to have a comic that is so stylistically different from anything else that DC puts out each month. It's about as far away from a conventional "house style" as you can get.<br />
<br />
Still a strong title and in no real danger of getting bumped off my pull list for the foreseeable future.<br />
<br />
<b>Huntress #1</b><br />
<b>Written by Paul Levitz; pencils by Marcus To; inks by John Dell; colours by Andrew Dalhouse; DC</b><br />
<br />
This is the first of a six-issue mini-series. The first thing that struck me about it is how unfortunate it is that DC hired Guillem March to do the covers instead of letting Marcus To handle them. The difference between the tacky mess of a cover and the gorgeous, classy art inside is almost shocking as you open the book. Marcus To was fantastic on Red Robin and here he continues to impress me with his clean lines and layouts. The only criticism I have of the art is that there isn't much to differentiate the women's faces from one another, but that's a very common problem in comics. In any case, it's not really a big enough deal to take anything away from my enjoyment of this first issue.<br />
<br />
Paul Levitz has a good handle on the character. This was a good, introduction to what seems like it's going to be a pretty straightforward (but potentially very satisfying) story. Helena's character doesn't seem to be affected by the relaunch at all (from what I can tell), so if you're a fan of the character you won't be disappointed.<br />
<br />
Solid first issue. I'm onboard.<br />
<br />
<b>Swamp Thing #2</b><br />
<b>Written by Scott Snyder; art by Yanick Paquette; colours by Nathan Fairbairn; DC</b><br />
<br />
The first issue was good, but this second issue is even better. Paquette's art (helped by Fairbairn's detailed colours) is blowing my mind.<br />
<br />
A large part of this issue is mostly just an info dump, as (one version of) Swamp Thing explains to Alec Holland what the deal is with the Green, the Parliament of Trees, and his connection to Swamp Thing. I was a little bit worried when I found out a few months ago that Swamp Thing was coming back to the DCU and that Alec Holland would be resurrected. I don't worship Alan Moore's work, but I think some of the concepts he established in in run on Swamp Thing are really rich and fascinating, and I didn't want to see that get wiped out of continuity.<br />
<br />
What's amazing is that Scott Snyder somehow manages to honour Moore's run while establishing a new status quo for the character. Instead of just retconning Moore's run, he adds new elements that force us to reinterpret it. I don't know how interesting it is to new readers, but I thought all the back story in this issue was great. And now I'm really excited to see where it's all going to lead.<br />
<br />
Scott Snyder is simply amazing. There's no doubt in my mind now that he's the best writer working for DC. I am so completely sold on what he's doing here and in Batman (and in his creator-owned work) that I'm basically just going to buy anything and everything he writes from now on. You want good comics? I suggest you do the same.Yan Basquehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12188814820654379029noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146616530890203634.post-81233419025461942242011-10-03T09:48:00.001-04:002011-10-03T11:18:17.744-04:00Is It Wednesday Yet?Coming this week is the first batch of #2 issues from DC's New 52. On my pull list are:<br />
<ul>
<li>Action Comics #2</li>
<li>Animal Man #2</li>
<li>Swamp Thing #2</li>
</ul>
In addition, DC also has two new miniseries launching this week:<br />
<ul>
<li>Huntress #1</li>
<li>Penguin: Pain and Prejudice #1</li>
</ul>
I'm definitely getting <i>Huntress</i>. In spite of the rather awful covers by Guillem March (why does everybody but me think this guy is a good artist?), the interior art by Marcus To promises to be absolutely gorgeous and well worth the cover price. Paul Levitz is writing. There's <a href="http://www.newsarama.com/php/multimedia/album.php?aid=44402">a preview here</a>.<br />
<br />
I think I'm gonna pass on the <i>Penguin</i> mini, though. It's written by Gregg Hurwitz with art by <span id="intelliTXT">Szymon Kudranksi, and I'm not familiar with either of their work so that's neither a plus or a minus. But I already have way too much Batman-family titles on my pull list, so I'm not really looking to add yet another. </span><br />
<span id="intelliTXT"><br /></span>
<span id="intelliTXT">Other stuff on my pull list:</span><br />
<ul>
<li><span id="intelliTXT">Sweet Tooth #26 (Vertigo)</span></li>
<li><span id="intelliTXT">Severed #3 (Image)</span></li>
<li><span id="intelliTXT">Mystic #3 (Marvel/CrossGen)</span></li>
<li><span id="intelliTXT">Superior #5 (Marvel/Icon)</span></li>
</ul>
<span id="intelliTXT"><i>Sweet Tooth</i> is Jeff Lemire's magnum opus, which just keeps getting better and better. <i>Severed</i> is a Scott Snyder horror project involving cannibals. <i>Mystic</i> is G. Willow Wilson's fantastic mini-series that I wish could go on forever instead of being a mini-series. It may be the best book of the year, due in no small part to the wonderful art by David Lopez and gorgeous colours by Nathan Fairbairn. <i>Superior</i> is the long-delayed Mark Millar/Leinil Yu fantasy about a boy who gets transformed into his favourite movie superhero, an analogue of Superman/Captain Marvel. I believe this is the penultimate issue.</span><br />
<br />
<span id="intelliTXT">Finally, IDW has a graphic novel called <i>All-Ghouls School</i> that might be worth a look. I'm not going to pick it up right away, mostly because I can't afford it right now when there are so many other books on my waiting list (more on that later). But it looks like it could be fun. There's <a href="http://blog.newsarama.com/2011/09/12/teaser-trailer-idws-all-ghouls-school/">a cheesy trailer for the book here</a>.</span><br />
<span id="intelliTXT"><br /></span><br />
<span id="intelliTXT">Full list of new releases is <a href="http://previewsworld.com/public/default.asp?t=2&m=1&c=6&s=428">here</a>.</span>Yan Basquehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12188814820654379029noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146616530890203634.post-50880948914500322012011-10-01T15:18:00.000-04:002011-10-20T16:12:33.360-04:00DC New 52 debriefing + a mini Daredevil review + indie OctoberPhew. September is over. One month of relentless hype, debate, outrage, excitement, confusion and snark. Fifty-two new #1s, all sold out. A tremendous success in terms of initial sales. And there's no doubt about it, DC has dominated the comics internet. To the point where maybe we're a little exhausted and sick of hearing about them.<br />
<br />
It's going to take a lot more hindsight before we can fully grasp what just happened and start to analyze its full implications. But I can tell you this: The dude who runs the comic book store I got to told me that before September they had about 90 reserves (i.e., clients who subscribe to books and have them set aside for them until they can pick them up) and now they have over 150. So it seems like a lot of these new readers, wherever they're coming from, are in it for more than just the first issues.<br />
<br />
I'm impressed. I wasn't at all convinced that this would work. I'm still not sure that this is an altogether positive things in the long run as far as what I personally want out of mainstream super-hero comic books from the Big Two, but I have to admit that DC seems to have hit its short term goals. Remains to be seen whether they'll be able to turn these into a viable long-term strategy.<br />
<br />
Out of the new 52, I only read 13 books. Here they are, sorted from best to worst:<br />
<br />
1. Animal Man<br />
2. Swamp Thing<br />
3. Wonder Woman<br />
4. Batman<br />
5. Action Comics<br />
6. Frankenstein, Agent of SHADE<br />
7. Batgirl<br />
8. Demon Knights<br />
9. Fury of Firestorm<br />
10. Supergirl<br />
11. Static Shock<br />
12. Stormwatch<br />
13. Justice League<br />
<br />
Of these 13, only Justice League was a true stinker. The top 4 were excellent. The next 5 were okay. The bottom four books are off my pull list. I'm going to stick with the other 9 for at least a few more issues to see where they're going.<br />
<br />
Noticeably absent from the list is Batwoman, which I wasn't able to get my hands on before it sold out at my store. I have the second printing on reserve and am looking forward to it. Other books that I think might have been worth a look, based on reviews and comments I've seen online: Justice League Dark, All Star Western, maybe Nightwing (especially because it seems like it's gonna tie in with Snyder's Batman), maybe The Flash (I love Francis Manapul's art, but Geoff Johns' run kinda turned me off the character), maybe even Teen Titans (if only because the reviews I've seen are quite positive - I still have a hard time getting past Brett Booth's awful art and Tim Drake's ridiculous new costume).<br />
<br />
Everything else I think can pretty safely be ignored. <br />
<br />
I'm going to resist the temptation to comment further on the issue of sexism in some of these books, because I would just be repeating myself at this point. (I will say, though, that I'm pretty disgusted by how the discussion about sexism in comics has morphed into a discussion about whether we're allowed to talk about it. If I read one more blog post about how all we have to do is ignore the bad books and promote the good ones for everything to magically fix itself, my head is going to explode.)<br />
<br />
My overall impression of the relaunch, based on what I've read and the comments and reviews I've seen online of the stuff I haven't read, is that although there are some good books, there isn't a lot of variety in the tone. You'll notice that my top four books above are all pretty dark/mature/serious/whatever. I don't hold that against them, because they do it well. But I get the impression that DC could really use a few light-hearted fun books.<br />
<br />
Again, this comes down to the fact that DC seem to be putting all their eggs in the same basket. Their primary target audience is males aged 18-34. (They've stated this officially, so I'm not making it up.) The problem is I don't think that demographic is large enough to support 52 books, so I don't understand why they didn't try to aim some of their new titles at different readers. Besides, it's not like males 18-34 are a uniform group.<br />
<br />
The perfect example of the type of book I think is missing from DC's line would be the current run of Daredevil, written by Mark Waid with art by Paolo Rivera. That book is probably my favourite thing that either of the two publishing giants are putting out right now. The art is fantastic and tone of the writing is light and fun, without making the story or characters seem trivial. It's colourful and flashy without being weird or inaccessible. I think it's a book that almost anyone can enjoy (I don't think I've seen a single negative review of it anywhere). It's almost like Mark Waid set out to prove that comics could be awesome without being grim and gritty, and he hits it right out of the park.<br />
<br />
I think DC could learn a thing or two from that comic. I like how dark and violent Azzarello and Chiang's Wonder Woman is. But I don't need every single book that DC puts out to be brutal or serious. The days when DC comics needed to prove to everyone that "comics aren't just for kids" are long gone. It's okay to lighten up a little.<br />
<br />
Anyway.<br />
<br />
October's here. Since September was all about DC, I want to spend this month focusing on some other publishers. Over the next few weeks, I'm going to make an effort to post about the titles on my pull list that are not set in either the DC or Marvel universes. Just to make sure people don't forget that there's a lot of variety out there. Comics are awesome.Yan Basquehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12188814820654379029noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146616530890203634.post-25033660022102488512011-09-24T13:32:00.000-04:002011-09-24T17:31:27.975-04:00Women in the New 52: Catwoman, Starfire, Wonder WomanFirst, a confession.<br />
<br />
I did not read <i>Catwoman</i> #1 or <i>Red Hood and the Outlaws</i> #1. I didn't read them because I didn't buy them. I didn't buy them because I didn't think they'd be any good. And based on the reactions I've seen online and on the several scanned pages from both books that have been circulating on blogs, I think I was right.<br />
<br />
I don't need to have read the books to see some of the problems with them. But since I didn't read them, I won't review them. And rather than offer a big rant about them, I will just link to two very excellent and well-argued pieces about them:<br />
<ul>
<li><a href="http://www.comicsalliance.com/2011/09/22/starfire-catwoman-sex-superheroine/">The Big Sexy Problem with Superheroines and Their 'Liberated Sexuality</a>,' by Laura Hudson, at Comics Alliance</li>
<li><a href="http://www.bleedingcool.com/2011/09/22/no-more-mutants-52-problems-by-andrew-wheeler/">52 Problems</a>, by Andrew Wheeler, at Bleeding Cool</li>
</ul>
Read them both. <br />
<br />
Meanwhile, at Newsarama, <a href="http://blog.newsarama.com/2011/09/22/judd-winick-speaks-out-on-the-controversial-catwoman-1/">Judd Winnick defends the sex scene</a> in <i>Catwoman</i> #1 with this:<br />
<blockquote>
This is a Catwoman for 2011, and my approach to her character and
actions reflect someone who lives in our times. And wears a cat suit.
And steals. It’s a tale that is part crime story, part mystery and part
romance. In that, you will find action, suspense and passion. Each of
those qualities, at times, play to their extremes. Catwoman is a
character with a rich comic book history, and my hope is that readers
will continue to join us as the adventure continues.</blockquote>
Well, I hope they don't. Ugh.<br />
<br />
But seriously, I'm baffled by how tone-deaf this writer can be about the character. It's weird, because when I first started following comics closely about two years ago, I kept hearing about this writer that people online really seemed to hate. I hadn't read any of Winnick's books, but the constant complaint about him on message boards was that he was using comics as a soapbox, constantly writing about gay or HIV-positive characters, and pushing his annoying liberal agenda down readers' throats. Those complaints made me really uncomfortable. It was the first time I started to realize just how conservative and bigoted comics fandom can be. There was something creepy about how much hate this guy was getting for writing about gay characters.<br />
<br />
Now, two years later, I feel like his bad rep was largely unjustified. I haven't read a lot of his work, but he just seems like an average writer who sometimes gets it right and sometimes gets it wrong. Or at least that was my impression before this whole Catwoman debacle happened. From the early interviews in his whole take on the character boiled down to "sexy sexy sexy," to the awful pages I've seen from the actual comic, to his add-insult-to-injury response quoted above, I'm starting to think maybe he's just a terrible writer who doesn't know how to write female characters. And this is a guy known for his liberal politics?<br />
<br />
I guess this serves as a useful reminder that even liberals can be sexist. (Or, if that sounds too much like an ad hominem attack, at least say or do or write sexist bullshit.)<br />
<br />
Another thing that bothers me about this controversy is the way people who don't see the problem respond to it by caricaturing the criticism and reducing it to prudishness. I've seen dozens of comments in response to blog posts that go like this: "What's the big deal? They're two consenting adults. What's wrong with them having sex?"<br />
<br />
There's nothing wrong with Catwoman and Batman having sex. None of the criticism I've seen has been anti-sex. It's about how this was portrayed, not the fact that it happened. It's about characters masquerading as "<a href="http://www.harkavagrant.com/index.php?id=311">strong female characters</a>" when they are actually male fantasies. It's about pandering to the <a href="http://kahnehteh.blogspot.com/2011/09/morning-afterupdate.html">lowest-common-denominator male fanbase</a>, when this relaunch is supposed to be about attracting new (and potentially non-straight-male) readership.<br />
<br />
While I was commenting on some of these issues on Twitter this week, someone told me I was basing my rants on two comics only and that, in fact, this doesn't reflect any widespread problem in DC's New 52. But, first of all, no, it's not just two comics. Do I need to remind you of Harley Quinn's new costume in <i>Suicide Squad?</i> Or Amanda Waller's sexy new supermodel look? I'm not saying every single book DC has put out this month has treated women like sex objects, but there's enough of a pattern here for us to really call them out on their shit and ask how that much-touted commitment to diversity somehow resulted in this.<br />
<br />
Still. It's worth remembering that DC is also putting out some good books this month, including quite a few that feature really good female characters. I'm pretty sure that Batwoman is one of those books, but unfortunately I wasn't able to get my hands on a copy of the first issue. I had mistakenly left it off my pull list and it sold out within hours before I could make it to the store. I've ordered the reprint.<br />
<br />
I did, however, get a copy of <i>Wonder Woman</i> #1, written by Brian Azzarello with art by Cliff Chiang, and I thought it was fantastic. I've seen some complaints about the level of gore and violence in the book, but I personally didn't have a problem with it. It's too bad that there isn't an all-ages Wonder Woman book that people can give to their kids and I agree that DC should publish such a book. But just because that book doesn't exist doesn't mean there's anything wrong with this one. It's violent and creepy and weird, and I loved it. The opening issue sets up some interesting villains while firmly establishing Wonder Woman's character, and Cliff Chiang's art is absolutely phenomenal. This might very well turn out to be the best looking book out of this month's 52 first issues.<br />
<br />
So DC is getting it right some of the time. And I'm very thankful for that. Those books that I enjoy are all going on my pull list and I will continue to support them. But I'm not going to stop criticizing them when they fail. (And, no, the fact that "Marvel's not going any better" is no excuse either. I'm not "singling them out" by pointing out DC's failings. I'm just concentrating on what I know. How well Marvel is doing has nothing to do with it.) If we want DC to finally get the message and stop putting out books that alienate their (real and/or potential) female readership, we have to stay vocal about it.<br />
<br />
Finally, check out <a href="http://www.comictwart.com/2011/09/batman-vs-catwoman.html">this alternative take on Batman and Catwoman's relationship</a>, by Mike Hawthorne. I like it a hell of a lot more than those last few pages of Judd Winnick's book.Yan Basquehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12188814820654379029noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146616530890203634.post-59314376452099434262011-09-17T19:34:00.000-04:002011-09-17T20:23:19.903-04:00Two Robin sketches from Montreal Comic Con 2011First, Dick Grayson (animated version), by Ty Templeton:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh3LCR2LgScrT0I6XKwrRdyWJFN4T_9HwKMHa3WfLcRkA9xx1265ciOBjFWFjXa9hd53OaGFwGlWWMb-AwNGHQmEzHyA3w9zz5-ZK1HdX31M37bbWNWn2XG-bKOAKJj1E8OtnugFLnLFAUA/s1600/Dick+Grayson+Robin+by+Ty+Templeton.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh3LCR2LgScrT0I6XKwrRdyWJFN4T_9HwKMHa3WfLcRkA9xx1265ciOBjFWFjXa9hd53OaGFwGlWWMb-AwNGHQmEzHyA3w9zz5-ZK1HdX31M37bbWNWn2XG-bKOAKJj1E8OtnugFLnLFAUA/s640/Dick+Grayson+Robin+by+Ty+Templeton.jpg" width="513" /></a></div>
<br />
And then Tim Drake, by Marco Rudy:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEji8VACjodT9R_RfeLRPVBIxQG0IsBFGAffPD-0_pWLV3S6fMcGzxAm9IdpdvXnqCXZWwHFYJ8E3qmiJDgQ1S2dP5JY-I2WUeOuNwdV5xRMQ1J3HBRqaSJ47WmnksSkJ9-x2shgCC6y2SV4/s1600/Tim+Drake+Robin+by+Marco+Rudy.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEji8VACjodT9R_RfeLRPVBIxQG0IsBFGAffPD-0_pWLV3S6fMcGzxAm9IdpdvXnqCXZWwHFYJ8E3qmiJDgQ1S2dP5JY-I2WUeOuNwdV5xRMQ1J3HBRqaSJ47WmnksSkJ9-x2shgCC6y2SV4/s640/Tim+Drake+Robin+by+Marco+Rudy.jpg" width="508" /></a></div>
<br />
I waited three hours in line to get these. (And to say hi to Gail Simone.) Good times.Yan Basquehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12188814820654379029noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3146616530890203634.post-75482075913637152692011-09-15T09:35:00.001-04:002011-10-20T16:14:15.647-04:00Diminishing returns (re: Amanda Waller and other stupid shit)(Part of this post is adapted from a late-night rant on Twitter while everybody else was apparently asleep.)<br />
<br />
(This is in response to <a href="http://dcwomenkickingass.tumblr.com/post/10214943226/aw">this</a>.) <br />
<br />
Okay, look, I don't know what goes on behind closed doors at DC Comics. I don't even know what goes on behind open doors. I'm just trying to understand. I know there is a reboot-that's-not-a-reboot going on. I know they want to make things different. And I know that every change potentially will anger some fans, and if DC worries about that too much, they won't be able to get anything done. But still. Just explain to me, somebody, please. What reasoning could possibly have led to the decision to make Amanda Waller skinny? <br />
<br />
How did this come about? Did DC editors sit together at a meeting and say, "Yeah, that fat bitch Amanda Waller, gotta do something about that"? Or, "Amanda Waller is a great character. We should do something with her." "Hey, what if we made her skinny?" <br />
<br />
I just don't understand. What purpose does it serve? Does it make the stories better? Can people relate to her better if she's thin? Does it make the character more marketable or recognizable or relatable or new-reader-friendly or fresh or edgy or whatever? What is it? Explain it to me, because I just can't make any sense of it. It seems utterly useless and wrong to me. <br />
<br />
I can only think of two possible explanations. <br />
<br />
1. Total ignorance at a level so incredibly high that it makes me embarrassed to imagine.<br />
<br />
2. Done on purpose because it will piss people off and make them talk, and controversy is better than apathy.<br />
<br />
I'd like to believe that DC editors are not the kind of disgusting filth that would actually go for #2. So I guess I'm going to have to assume that this was a result of ignorance and stupidity. Unless someone else can suggest another possible explanation that I'm missing. But whatever the reasoning was, I just find this extremely sad.<br />
<br />
I've been a good sport since the launch of the New 52. I was a very vocal critic of a lot of DC's decision, but when the relaunch finally came, I cheered for it despite my problems with some aspects of it. I was onboard. I bought books I hadn't originally planned to read*. I was surprised by some of them. I wrote positive reviews (and meant every word in 'em). I shared my enthusiasm on Twitter and elsewhere. Yeah, I still think making Barbara Gordon Batgirl again was a terrible idea, but if Gail Simone is making a good book out of it, I'll give it a chance. <br />
<br />
But then I see this kind of bullshit and it's like DC is thanking me with a slap in the face. It makes embarrassed for supporting this company. Being a fan of DC lately means constantly being ashamed of the stupid shit they pull EVERY FREAKING WEEK, it seems.<br />
<br />
It almost makes me regret buying all those books the last two weeks. I was going to jump off the bandwagon with this relaunch, but like a well-trained spineless little fanboy, I marched to the comic book store and gave them my money in exchange for those overpriced little colourful pamphlets full of incredibly stupid characters doing incredibly stupid things for the sake of our entertainment. And now I feel ashamed.<br />
<br />
Ultimately, what they did to Amanda Waller is no worse than what they did to Barbara Gordon or any of the other characters who were negatively affected by the reboot and lost some of what made them special in the first place. So why is this the change that inspires this rant? I don't even know. I'm just sick of DC shitting on the characters and the fans who love them. And I just know that if anybody asks Dan DiDio about this at a convention, he's going to roll his eyes and yell out, "Next question." And maybe if people bitch about it on Twitter and Tumblr enough, then the following week, they're going to put out an official statement saying that, no, in fact they really really care what people think and diversity is important to them and blablabla. I don't care anymore, DC. I can already imagine all your half-assed attempts to spin this into a positive thing because I've read them a thousand times over. <br />
<br />
What am I going to do about it besides posting this rant? Am I going to stop buying comics? Well, no. I'm just pointing out that it's one more blow, and every time something like this happens I care a little less about these characters and this company. There have been a lot of blows lately. And it almost came to a point where I completely lost interest. But then somehow the excitement of the New 52 won me over. But it's a case of diminishing returns. It may not be today, it may not be this week, it may not even be this year. But at some point, I'm going to say, "You know what? Fuck this shit. These books are not worth spending my money on anymore." It's even possible that this has already happened and I'm just in denial about it, holding on desperately to my own illusions because I WANT TO LIKE COMICS more than I actually like them. <br />
<br />
(* Yes! I actually buy every comic book I read, not like a lot of other people who cry foul on Tumblr and Twitter and who download all their books for free on torrent sites.)Yan Basquehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12188814820654379029noreply@blogger.com0