Friday Follow Up – 05/24/13

There are some truly classic runs in superhero comics: Kirby and Lee’s “Fantastic Four”, James Robinson’s “Starman”, Chris Claremont’s “X-Men”. As of this Wednesday, after nine years on the title, Geoff John’s “Green Lantern” is assured a spot alongside these legends.

I won’t say that “Green Lantern” was a perfect book. It had its rough patchs, especially after the New 52 reboot, when it engaged in a series of anti-climatic events. That is to be expected when considering almost a decade of stories though. It’s more important to consider the longview when evaluating an achievement like this. No one will remember the “Rise of the Army” in ten years, but the rainbow of Lantern Corps. and John’s characterization of Hal Jordan will still shine bright.

John’s “Green Lantern” did a lot more than tell good stories, which it certainly did. It helped to define a character (actually, a lot of characters) that were at best muddled and without great importance. The concept of continuity had destroyed the characters of the Green Lantern universe, turning the central hero into a dead, genocidal maniac trapped inside a vengeful ghost. No, I can’t make this crap up. In six issues, Johns turned Hal into a hero again and redefined his supporting cast. The scenes in Rebirth where each of Earth’s four Lanterns are shown using their rings in a unique style inform readers more about the characters than all of the 90′s combined. Every component of the Lantern legend played a part, whether it was Hal’s dearest friend Ollie or his fiercest foe, Sinestro. He boiled the story back to its basic elements before rebuilding.

And what a reconstruction it was. One of Johns’ greatest strengths as a writer is to take old ideas (good and bad) and reshape them to both create a more cohesive whole and to construct new ideas. It’s a skill that’s particularly well suited to superhero comics, where there tends to be a lot of history and not a lot of story logic. Now just consider all of the things that have been added to the Green Lantern mythos in the last nine years while Johns’ helmed the title…
1. Red Lantern Corps.
2. Larfleeze
3. Sinestro Corps. War
4. Fulfillment of Alan Moore’s Blackest Night Prophecy
5. Blue Lantern Corps.
6. Simon Baz
7. Indigo Tribe
8. The First Lantern
9. Black (and White) Lanterns
10. Alpha Lanterns

That’s not to mention all of the things he reinvented entirely…
1. Nekron
2. Star Sapphires
3. The Guardians
4. Alan Moore’s Blackest Night prophecy
5. Black Hand
6. Parallax
7. Hal Jordan’s entire origin
8. The Manhunters
9. Ring logic (e.g. importance of fearlessness)
10. Structure of the Green Lantern Corps.

That second list leaves out the single most important reimagination though, that of Sinestro. The greatest icons have the greatest villains. In many ways, Superman is defined by Lex Luthor and Batman is defined by The Joker. Green Lantern lacked a defining antagonist. Sinestro was a one-note villain ten years ago, an evil space dictator with a yellow ring. He’s now one of the best characterized characters in all of DC Comics. His struggle to do the right thing in spite of his overwhelming ego (insert joke about having a big head here) was a central theme in the entire run of the series. Redemption and rebirth are two things that both he and Hal Jordan engage in constantly, striving to improve themselves and the universe despite being terrible flawed. That’s why Sinestro’s story pays off so well in Green Lantern #20. It speaks volumes about why we care about Green Lantern stories and what they tell us about ourselves. Sinestro, just like Hal Jordan, shows us that we can always try to be better and that is what’s both so damn tragic and so damn beautiful.

Some of my feelings towards this book may be nostalgia. “Green Lantern: Rebirth” was one of the first books I ever picked up on a monthly basis alongside John’s “The Flash”. It was a story that pulled me into an expansive universe and made me feel welcome. It’s representative of Geoff John’s at his best, ushering a kid with only a few dollars into a world filled with fanstastical stories and characters.

It’s more than just nostalgia though, it’s a recognition of something truly iconic. I tend to agree with Grant Morrison that superheroes are in many ways analogous to the gods of old. They are a pantheon of characters, each defined by some core characteristics, that are capable of inspiring our imaginations and our morality (a significant improvement over the Greek pantheon). Green Lantern was a character that began the new millenium as muddled and amoral, part of the DC pantheon in name only. He’s now a peer to Batman and Superman (the best superhero of all time, no argument). Green Lantern and his supporting cast are crystallized in the final issue, their essence made clear, and their ability to inspire greatness obvious. Geoff John’s final issue of “Green Lantern” is a perfect ending to a legendary run.

Thank you, Mr. Johns.

Wednesday Checkup – 05/22/2013

The Bounce #1

I appreciate Joe Casey’s unique voice in the world of comics. It’s what keeps this book enjoyable, despite not being sure what it’s trying to say or do. The opening chapter is fun, but I’m not going to recommend jumping on quite yet.

Five Ghosts: The Haunting of Fabian Gray #3

This continues to be a fun, pulpy journey that embraces its uniqueness, instead of being an homage to other properties. This is what comics are all about.

Green Lantern #20

I don’t think I will be able to read another writer’s Green Lantern after this. This is how you do an ending folks. It’s perfect in all of the ways that count.

Nowhere Men #5

This continues to be a standout at Image, on par with The Manhattan Projects or Fatale. If you like new ideas, you should be all over this book.

Sex #3

Sex is set at simmer right now, meaning that if you enjoyed the first two issues you’ll like this. If not, it’ll feel boring. Nothing much happens, so I won’t try to defend it too much either. However, if you did pick this book up, read the letters column. Joe Casey knows a helluva lot about comics and is always worth listening to.

Superior Spider-Man #10

After the events of last issue, Slott is beginning to setup more dominoes. It’s a little slower in pace, but for this book, that doesn’t mean much. Spidey hasn’t been this fun and campy since Sam Raimi was directing the films.

Uncanny X-Men #6

Frazier Irving is an almost perfect fit for the art on this book. The characters aren’t overly bombastic in nature and fit better into Bendis favorite type of scene (i.e. standing around talking), but the horror components are elemental and ugly (i.e. goat-head Magick). It’s also nice to actually have some real action in a book that has spent five issues teasing it.

Young Avengers #5

I. Love. This. Book.

Friday Follow Up – 05/17/2013

I’ll be honest. None of the new releases I read this week compelled me to write about them for 1000+ words. So rather than struggle to find things to say about Wonder Woman #20 (besides it’s a damn good read), I’m going to take a look at a relatively new, ongoing series and it’s use of panel composition. Sounds exciting, right? These are my thoughts on Kieron Gillen’s “Young Avengers”.

Addendum: Even if you’re not currently reading “Young Avengers”, I’ve done my best to avoid mentioning any spoilers in this article, so feel free to read ahead and check out some of the great things being done in this book.

Composition in comics is a lot like cinematography in films. It’s an incredibly important part of every comic. Without a good sense of composition, any piece falls apart and becomes largely impenetrable. Yet it’s rarely noticed by most of its audience. A bad (or simply mediocre) sense of composition can make a book unreadable, even if we do not always recognize it as the central cause for a poor reading experience. It’s something that is often taken for granted. However, when a page is crafted in an innovative and effective way, sometimes the audience takes notice.

“Young Avengers” is a book in which you can’t help but take notice.

The standard composition of comics can typically be described by several types of panel transitions. According to Scott McCloud there are six, although most comics rely largely on three: action-to-action, subject-to-subject, and scene-to-scene. These transitions between two sequential pictures are exactly what they sound like the juxtaposition of two different actions, subjects, or scenes, allowing readers to imagine what occurs in between (in a process known as closure). It’s easy to flip through most books and quickly recognize the prominence of these three types of transitions (let me be clear, there’s nothing wrong with this, it’s the same standard of composition set forth by folks like Jack Kirby and Will Eisner and it’s incredibly effective). It’s easier to look at examples of non-standard compositions to recognize how versatile a page of comics can be though.

The series started out with a bold statement in this two-page spread. Hawkeye’s (not Hawkguy’s) inner monologue is detached from the individual beat of the panels. This leaves her thoughts detached from the closure occuring between panels and thus from a sense of time. Rather than seeing her think “I’m doing this anyway” as she rushes to the controls, the audience sees the action occur separately her thoughts about this situation. The panels are almost all of the “subject-to-subject” variety, moving between attacking aliens, Hawkeye, Noh-Varr, and the ship. This redoubles on itself as the subjects resurface every few panels, allowing readers to take in the action again as “action-to-action”. The combination of this panel juxtaposition and detachment of words creates the effect of a summarized action sequence, to be taken in from multiple perspectives. It’s all there, the whole thirty seconds (rough guess) of an oncoming attack and the thoughts spurred by the moment, but it’s interpretation and effect is left to be continually defined by the reader. It creates a clear thesis about what this page and, subsequently, this book are about. It’s about young people and adventure. It’s about fantastical problems and crazier solutions. It’s about taking risks and it’s all very cool. Let me remind you that all of this information is relayed in a scene as basic as having two superheroes respond to a threat. The impact boils down to how the page is put together.

Issue four featured another action sequence contained in a two-page spread. This spread challenges some definitions of comics. The central panel can be taken by itself. It reads like an entire action sequence, juxtaposing a series of moments in a single panel of art. It begs the question of whether or not diagrams are comics. I’m inclined to believe so, even more so with evidence like this on my side. The numbering serves a two-fold purpose, helping to guide the readers eye through the sequence of actions and corresponding notes, which create a specific tone for this raucous blitz. Like more familiar action-to-action sequences, there is a clear progression of events, relating a story. The key difference is the removal of gutters, instead allowing the negative space between drawings of Noh-Varr to create closure. Without the description index, the close-ups spanning the corners, or even the numbering, the story is well written and paced. This panel makes a strong case that labeled and unlabeled diagrams fall into the medium of comics, even emotionally unattached and boring ones like instructions on disassembling an engine or Billy’s wanderings in “Family Circus”.

Speaking of Billy’s wanderings (ouch, that transition hurt)… One last example of the kind of experimentation going on within this book is the (literal) breakage of panel structure. This page better represents an escape from inter-dimensional confinement than the most detailed of paintings. Comics are dependent upon symbolic language, typically in the form of drawings, onomatopoeia, and speech bubbles. In this instance, one of the fundamental components of a comic is transformed into a symbol within the story. The frame becomes a prison and the page becomes the panel. The cells still help to guide the reader, along with the movements of Billy and Kid Loki, but they are no longer an element of construction. They are now an element of the story and one which helps to convey a lot of information. Billy has been captured by an “interdimensional parasite” and rather than simply telling the reader about the monsters abilities, Gillen and McKelvie show the reader. What better way to express a control over reality than to warp the very reality of the comic itself. Playing with form effectively displays power in a way that is both intriguing and disturbing to the reader.

The truth is that these are just some of the most obvious examples of what makes the panel composition in “Young Avengers” so refreshing. The introduction and credits pages are a blast to review. Issue four established a motif of crossing, diagonal panels, reflecting the conflict and dramatic crossfire of the scene. These decisions don’t exist purely for the sake of experimentation either. They add value to the story and themes of the book, whether it’s in expressing tone effectively or making action scenes feel as dynamic as they should. Innovation, at its best, serves a purpose. The innovative ideas in “Young Avengers” are behooved to the story and themes of the book. That’s why they aren’t just interesting, they’re effective. There are a lot of cool things occurring in the pages of this book and the three examples above are just the obvious, but small, tip of the metaphorical iceberg.

And beyond that there’s a lot more to like, including dynamic characters, an incredible sense of humor, and the feel of being the coolest comic to hit shelves since “Scott Pilgrim”. I’d try to write some cool and funny endorsement to reflect the quality of this book, but I think that’s best left to Marvel B… I mean, Noh Varr:

Wednesday Checkup – 05/15/2013

I’m currently traveling for work, which means I’m writing on from Denver International Airport right now. This has also left me unable to read anything from my physical pull file today. So please check back tomorrow for some quick thoughts on Fables #129, Morning Glories #26, and Wonder Woman #20. Everything else from this week is ready for consumption though!

UPDATE Back from Colorado with updates to the books I could not read yesterday. Enjoy!

Age of Ultron #8

Recommendation: I found this entire issue to be problematic at best. All I want to say now (since I plan on writing a much larger piece on the completed series) is that if you expect people to care about something, you should give them a reason first.

Dream Merchant #1

Recommendation: Even if you think this isn’t your cup of tea, it may be worth checking out. Edmondson has written a lot of very strong (and odd) books at Image and this appears to keep pace. It’s also the size of two comics (50+ pages) without any increase in price. If the rest of the series is as fun to read as this first issue, that’s more than a bargain, it’s a steal.

Fables #129

Recommendation: I can’t help but feel that there’s been some loss of narrative propulsion. The events of this issue are big, but didn’t feel big. Don’t get me wrong, I still enjoyed the read, but it was missing something.

Fatale #14

Recommendation: The last of the one-shot stories ties back into the very beginning of the series, creating a nice sense of closure (however, temporary) before Brubaker plunges into the next arc. On top of all that, Nazi monsters! How can you go wrong with Ed Brubaker and Nazi monsters? (Spoiler: You can’t.)

FF #7

Recommendation: Fraction and Allred have managed to capture so many of the themes that made the original Lee and Kirby run of “Fantastic Four” so important. It’s heartfelt, innovative and all sorts of fun. This may be my favorite Marvel series right now (besides Hawkguy, of course).

Morning Glories #26

Recommendation: Apparently this was left out of my pull file, meaning I have an excuse to visit my local comic book store again tomorrow!

Wonder Woman #20

Recommendation: In order to understand how much I like this book, you have to understand that I loooooved “100 Bullets”. Wonder Woman is very similar in style and pacing. Huge cast of characters, each with their own motives, and most importantly doomed plans. The last few panels of this issue filled me with a triumphant roar and a terrible sense of dread. If Azzarello’s run lasts 100 issues, it may still end too soon.

Comics Criticism

One of the things I struggle with the most when writing this blog is the purpose of criticism. It’s important that criticism doesn’t appear like the that of the 90′s cartoon (which I highly recommend). More developed media, like film, have been shaped in important and positive ways by critics (e.g. Pauline Kael, Jean-Luc Goddard). However, comics have not developed nearly as many theorists or critics as of yet. Besides video games, it may have the most underdeveloped set of theories amongst all popular media. So when I write comics criticism, I take it very seriously. Criticism has the ability to elevate art, increase discourse, and inform consumers. It is the basis for reaction to art, so it’s worthwhile to consider the unique challenges and common problems of comics criticism.

Every famous critic is associated with a specific medium and often a movement within said medium, whether it is Roger Ebert and films or Samuel Taylor Coleridge and English literature. Each medium is unique in how it is created and presented and thus requires a unique understanding, one learned from spending thousands of hours exploring it. A solid understanding of storytelling can allow someone to evaluate the principles of a story in any format, but good criticism ought to go further. A bad story can be told with innovative skill and that deserves to be recognized. Liking or disliking the story is at best a supplementary analysis of any piece. Although there are dozens of common challenges one could point to surrounding comics, there are a few that stand out:

1. Format
Comics are published in a wide variety of formats, ranging from small daily strips (e.g. Dilbert by Scott Adams) to massive, completed tomes (e.g. Building Stories by Chris Ware). Although the monthly pamphlet (usually 22 pages in length) is the most common form of comics publication, it is far from a standard. James Robinson’s “Starman” is an excellent example of a high quality runs of comics. It is now composed of six collected editions, which are subsequently composed of several stories each, which are often composed of multiple issues and sometimes additional mini-series. It’s possible to evaluate these collections on any level, but important to consider the other levels at all times. Unlike films, plays, or novels comics are often published in a piece-meal format and that has to be taken into account when evaluating them.

In this regard, comics are more like television than other media. They are both extremely versatile in how they are published and collected.

2. Creative Mix
Comics, more often than not, are the product of a collaborative effort. Creators like Chris Ware and Art Spiegelman control every part of the stories they create, but most comics are generated by at least two individuals. There can be many more involved though, including letterers, inkers, and co-writers. Unlike the evaluation of other literature, comics must consider the input of more than one individual, in a process that is unique to each book. This means that it may often be best to consider a piece on its individual merits, before comparing it to the catalogue of the creators involved. Without in-depth knowledge of the creative process, it is difficult to criticize individual participants involved with the creation of the final product. This also makes scripts and break downs of page development incredibly valuable tools to critics. Many independent artists, like Fiona Staples, have begun to make examples of their step-by-step process available to the public.

In this regard, comics are more like films than other media. It requires a deep understanding of the process and roles involved to create a finished piece in order to evaluate the creators fairly.

3. Basis of Critiques
Unlike modern film or literary criticism, comics lack a strong historical basis or educational curriculum to use as a basis for evaluation. We’re lucky to have individuals like Scott McCloud (“Understanding Comics”) who have written some of the best theoretical work about the medium thus far. It should be required reading (and re-reading) for anyone who writes comics criticism or, for that matter, anyone who reads comics. There is still relatively little out there in regards to theoretical readings though. This is also why it’s so important for critics of comics, whether they be paid or self-published, to take their role in the creative process seriously. This medium is barely past its infancy and there are few authorities talking about it. For people seeking to learn more, any voice with a hint of seriousness may be taken as the truth.

In this regard, comics are more like video games than other media. They are both developing at an incredibly fast pace and there are very few starting points to learn about the medium itself, creating many self-taught experts who can help or hinder future efforts.

So with that in mind, it is worth addressing some of the most common problems in contemporary comics criticism. If you believe that criticism is important, as I do, then it’s important to be critical of not just those writing comics, but those writing about them.

1. Summarization
There is nothing lazier than a review that summarizes the plot. For readers looking for a recommendation, it ruins the experience. For readers looking to engage, it provides nothing of substance. This is not to say that a plot should not be mentioned in criticizing a piece, but it should not be part of a recommendation or the focus of any piece of serious evaluation. This is why I have attempted to divide my reviews into two groups. The first is the Wednesday Checkup, in which I provide a brief recommendation on a wide variety of book. The latter is the Friday Follow Up, where I analyze a new piece on a wide variety of issues for people who have had a chance to read the work in question already.

2. Self-involvement
Mentioning one’s own taste can help make clear potential prejudices and that makes for a more honest approach. I am a big fan of Brian Azzarello. He’s a really funny guy and someone who I enjoy talking to. I try to make that clear when talking about his writing and do my best to distance my personal opinion from any analysis. Proclaiming that you love a character or writer and then singing the praises of a book simply because they are involved is intellectually dishonest. It does not follow that since an idea is cool or anticipated, the story will be good. There needs to be a line drawn between personal enjoyment and critical analysis.

3. Understanding Comics
The most difficult part of comics criticism is understanding comics. Comics are told using a wide variety of unique tools. Without understanding these tools, it is impossible to provide a full evaluation of any piece of work. Even if you don’t reference word-picture dynamics, the artistic process, or closure, they are still incredibly important to understand when providing analysis. It’s the same concept as the reviewer of a poem understanding meter or alliteration.

4. Pandering
As a relatively nubile medium, it is much easier for comics fans and critics to interact with creators than in other media like novels or film. This also leaves the potential benefits of pandering much greater. A very small collection of publishers (read: DC Comics and Marvel) control a large portion of creative talent and are more inclined to provide interviews to websites that provide more favorable reviews. Reviewers can state positive hyperbole about books in order to get re-tweeted or some kind words from a creator. It’s perfectly acceptable to praise work as good, but praise should be accompanied by examples and explanation. A critic does not exist to proclaim something as good or bad, but to help understand that something. Saying that the artwork and layout in Grant Morrison and Frank Quitely’s “WE3” is stunning is an empty compliment. However, if I include an example, you can see what I mean. Moreover, I can discuss Quitely’s collection of close up cels being pulled from a greater scene. The overlapping details help to show the action of the page better than a standard spread could have. He is able to emphasize the most important components of the moment to establish tone, while bunching them together creating a sense of propulsion as the page is read.

I don’t know all of the answers when it comes to comics. I know far, far less than I would like. The keys to learning are discourse and study. Those are both things encouraged by criticism. In order to be critical, one must consume a great deal of any subject matter. Criticism in return should not be a one-way street. That’s why I’m always thankful for the thoughtful responses provided by those of you reading this. You help me think and learn more than I could ever hope to on my own. It’s my sincere hope that I stimulate you in return (read: dirty joke inserted into a rather dry column). With relatively little critical analysis available (and even less with the shutdown of Comics Alliance, may it rest in peace), it’s as important as ever to engage and write about comics. There’s a lot to be learned and the best way to keep learning is to keep thinking and talking.

Friday Follow Up – 05/10/2013

DC Comics new digital-first series, “The Adventures of Superman”, released its second issue this Tuesday written and illustrated by Jeff Lemire. If you’re unfamiliar with the concept of digital-first, it is simply the publication of comics only on digital platforms (e.g. Comixology), which may or may not be physically published at a later date.

Lemire’s issue reads like a love letter. It considers with care and eloquence what makes its subject, Superman, so very special. Using the framing device of children playing, it looks at why people like Superman and what he informs us about ourselves. It reads like Shakespearean similes quoted between lovers or dear friends, but is told in a way that only comics could truly accomplish. It becomes a story about who Superman is to the people who care about his stories. The narrative is not the important component of the comic; it is in many ways a non-story. The ease with which Lemire seems to write the issue obscures the difficulty of what he accomplishes in making the comic compelling and crafting an intricate message about Superman, without allowing it to become maudlin or too direct.

An important thing to consider before dissecting any of the story is how the framing device of the comic functions. Two boys are at play, pretending one is Superman and the other Brainiac (then various other nefarious faces). They discuss Superman and what they want to imagine in dialogue that feels genuine, something difficult to do with children and it’s an area where Lemire always seems to flourish. The important thing to note about their conversation and the background is that at no time does it indicate Superman is real. Although he appears in the final pages, he never once interacts with the children or their world. The setting of the story isn’t established to be the fictional Smallville or the very real Essex County. The setting transcends the farm, the fort, and the woods through which the children play. Like Superman, the setting is not actually a physical one. It is a mental one, set wherever people have dreamed about Superman. Whether you’re aware of this or not, it allows the reader to settle into the place of the children and relate with their shared experience. As the children imagine stories of Superman, so does the reader. It is an elegant and incredibly effective way to have readers project themselves onto the story and experience the ideas within.

The imagined battle plays through a series of typical Superman story beats. It begins with a mystery, the Fortress of Solitude has been left open, but Superman moves forward into the unknown, undeterred. As the story progresses, the villain changes from Brainiac to Mr. Mxyzptlk (didn’t even have to Google that), Zod, in an oddly cop-like uniform, and many others. It doesn’t matter how strange or powerful the villain is though. Superman remains, prepared to confront any challenge. The challenge in this case is saving the bottled city of Kandor, where thousands of surviving Kryptonians reside. Superman never gives in to the Brainiac’s machinations and saves both himself and the people of Kandor. All of the story beats pull from classic elements of Superman tales. Superman confronts the unknown head on, fights whatever evil threatens others, and always does his best to protect those in need.

The core of the story lies in the final words, overheard by a distant Superman, “Superman always wins.” Those words don’t reflect a cynical outlook on superhero stories; they reflect faith in Superman and what he represents. Superman is an iconic character. In the best Superman stories (e.g. “Birthright”, “All-Star Superman”) he represents the very best of humanity. He is a symbol of hope, strength, generosity, kindness, and so much more. That’s what people think of, when they think of Superman. That final statement does not just reveal faith in Superman, but faith in humanity, and one that is inherently shared amongst fans of the Man of Steel. We don’t believe Superman will win because he’s more powerful. One child gleefully points out that, “Doomsday is way more powerful!” Lemire shows that we believe he will win because he ought to. It’s a statement of faith in humanity, not super strength or laser vision.

Lemire’s artwork creates an additional level to this message. In his creator owned titles like “Underwater Welder” and “Essex County”, characters are crafted in a mundane and often world-weary manner. Adults always appear a little uglier or fatter as the years accumulate, while children tend to be more spry with limbs like twigs. Physical attributes are over-emphasized and better inform the story than typical “house” styles. His illustrations are more effective in conveying details about characters, than the most finely detailed paintings in comics. His Superman in turn appears more human with a farmer’s sort of-face. It’s the appearance of a man who has sweated most of his life and may have had his nose broken a few times. So rather than appearing as a well-muscled heartthrob, he takes on an everyman appeal. He is less god-like and significantly more relatable. In Lemire’s Superman, it is possible to not just see a great fictional hero, but the ones that populate our everyday lives. He may bare a resemblance to one’s father, a favorite teacher, a mentor, etc… No matter who he may remind you of, this Superman is a realizable hero.

Lemire’s layouts also deserve a mention. The books he writes and illustrates always display a deep understanding of how comics are assembled and read. There is less innovation here than in “Sweet Tooth” or his other titles, but there’s also only a handful of pages. Mirroring images of the boys and their imagined characters reflect the incredible power of imagination and stories to change our perception, pointing out once more the import of this character. The final words whipped away by the wind, only to be picked up by Superman’s super-hearing is something that Will Eisner (never a fan of speech bubbles) would most likely have loved to read. It’s worth a couple of re-reads simply to see how this book is assembled.

Jeff Lemire has shown that he is one of the most talented new creators to comics in novel and epic-sized works over the last few years, but this story shows that his mastery of the medium extends beyond larger works. In the smallest of issues, Lemire says a great deal about a character beloved throughout the world and almost a century old. Bravo.

P.S. If you haven’t heard, Vertigo is publishing a new mini-series by Mr. Lemire, “Trillium”, starting this summer. Add it to your pull lists.

Weekly Checkup – 05/08/2013

Avengers Arena #9

Recommendation: What’s this a character driven drama where deaths are impactful for real reasons and not shock value? That’s not possible in superhero comics, is it? It is. Dennis Hopeless is the guy doing it. Damn him for making me like this book and depressing the hell out of me this Wednesday.

Batman #20

Recommendation: Scott Snyder is still a relatively new writer to comics and he has really shown he has some chops these last few months. This two-parter gives a real sense of his talent. It’s exciting and emotionally impactful, instead of just being a small break between longer arcs. If you aren’t reading Batman go get #19 and #20, you won’t regret it.

The Private Eye #2

Recommendation: What’s your excuse for not reading a free download of one of the best books currently being published? You don’t have one? That’s odd, because Brian K. Vaughan and Marcos Martin are a dynamite combination creating a stunning sci-fi mystery, one which you select your own price for. Now get on over to PanelSyndicate.com

Star Wars #5

Recommendation: I can almost hear the opening score from “A New Hope” everytime I read this book. It really captures the essence of the original films. From the battles to the banter, this book nails it. If you like the good Star Wars trilogy, you ought to be reading this.

Thor: God of Thunder #8

Recommendation: Jason Aaron gets Thor. Thor drinks ale and smashes things; it’s awesome. Gorm seems like an odd, demonized version of Richard Dawkins at this point, but this book isn’t about the bad guy. It’s about Thor, actually, three Thors. And they all do Thor-y things. And it’s all very cool.

Uncanny Avengers #8

Recommendation: This book continues to improve on a relatively weak opening story arc. It’s also shaping up to be a good companion piece to Remender’s “Uncanny X-Force”. If you’ve stuck with it this far, this is the beginning of the payoff.

The Walking Dead #110

Recommendation: If you’re already reading this book, like me, you’ll probably keep reading it. There’s a lot of manufactured drama (two whole scenes are entirely unnecessary) in this issue and the good bits are buried under some pretty terrible writing. With any luck, Kirkman will get back to doing what he’s best at and the war will begin.

Come back Friday when I’ll take a closer look at the digital first “Adventures of Superman” #1 and #2.

Friday Follow Up – 05/03/2013

This will be the first Friday Follow Up under the new format. I’ll be examining two books released by Image this week: the conclusion of “Snapshot” by Andy Diggle and Jock and the debut of “Ten Grand” by J. Michael Straczynski and Ben Templesmith. Be aware that these reviews will contain some spoilers. I will not be summarizing the plot, but if spoilers bother you and you have not read the books, go no further.

Snapshot

Written by: Andy Diggle
Illustrated by: Jock

“Snapshot” is in some ways best discussed by what it is not. It is not a genre piece. It is not a story with a happy ending. It is not a book edited to fit a market. Because of all of the things it is not, it is a very good comic.

The first three issues of the book created an interesting mystery and a series of compelling action sequences (I could re-read the bike chase in issue two a dozen times). They laid a solid foundation for an enjoyable mini-series, whatever the outcome. In the final issue, Andy Diggle sticks the landing and shows why the ending is the conceit. This is why the book can be defined by precisely what it is not. It is not the story of a protagonist beating the bad guy. It is not the story of a protagonist growing up and improving himself. It is therefore a story about something much more than the typical hero’s journey.

The concluding moments of the book reveal an antagonist that is beyond Jake’s, and for that matter the reader’s, power. The ominous McGarrett is not even the “bad guy”, as Jake puts it, he is merely the representative of greater powers. He is the representation of the worst-case scenario for those who participated in the Occupy Movement or support Anonymous. He represents a world controlled by the powerful, not for nefarious reasons, but simply because they are the powerful and will remain so. Protests, rebellions, demonstrations, they are all merely aberrations in the grand scheme, cancer cells which will be cut out. The wall of pinkies reveal just how effectively these obstructions have always been removed. In the end Jake is powerless to do anything to affect change. He picks up the gun and accepts the world as it is and how it always will be: beyond his control.

That single “BLAM” rings out for good reason. It reflects an impotence that has been widely accepted. Consider modern political reactions and movements, such as Occupy Wall Street or the reaction to Sandy Hook. There was a great deal of sound and fury about the devastating impact of the events that inspired them, but ultimately no real change. The Occupy protests, the calls for a safer society after Sandy Hook, the rioting at the conclusion of “Snapshot”, and Jake’s own journey are all shown to be the same. They are all loud, but ultimately change nothing. They are cries from people without power and who remain powerless. The story of “Snapshot” doesn’t provide us with a picture of an everyman hero, it provides us with a picture of everyman’s impotence. Whether you believe the comparison to be true or not, it’s effective and scary.

The strength of the story is enhanced exponentially by the art of Jock. His work is never a grade below excellent, whether it be on covers or interiors. He also has a history with Andy Diggle, which shows how well suited the two creators are for one another in books like “The Losers” and “Green Arrow: Year One”. Jock’s work on this book shows how a sense of realism need not be hamstrung by sharp lines which rely on inkers for depth. Whereas pencilers like Jim Lee and Ethan Van Sciver tightly outline the forms of characters and backgrounds, Jock more ably captures the essence of a moment with fewer lines. The streaks of rain and spiked explosions of a gunshot meld into the panel to create an effective atmosphere, affecting a visceral tone to the dramatic beats in each panel. Characters are recognizable in the same way people are, for their outstanding characteristics, whether it be Jake Dobson’s long face and emo boy-band hair or Detective Gray’s police-tastic moustache. The reader will never be in doubt of who it is they’re looking at and what that person is like. At its core, Jock’s sense of composition both in and between panels, is simply good story telling.

The choice to not color “Snapshot” when republishing it in America was probably wise. It leaves each panel starkly exposed, making the violence more vicious and facial expressions more honest. The ink splatters in scenes like the one above add a sense of chaos to the pages and emphasize the impact of the violence. They are reminiscent of a Ralph Steadman painting and would undoubtedly have lost something in translation, if the book were fully colored.

When taken as a whole, “Snapshot” stands as an achievement in terms of its story, art, and the dramatic combination of the two. Although it read well as four individual chapters, it excels as a complete book. It will be a paperback (and hopefully a hardcover) worth displaying on library shelves, loaning to friends, and rereading for years to come.

Ten Grand

Written by: J. Michael Straczynski
Illustrated by: Ben Templesmith

The first issue of “Ten Grand” reads as equal parts detective fiction and supernatural thriller. It’s reminiscent of “Hellblazer” at its best, but stands as a unique book from the first page. Like so much good detective fiction it’s built upon a very flawed hero and a world which is similar to our own, but not one in which we would want to exist. Joe is not a very nice guy. Killing people for a living tends to have that effect. However, he’s funny and loves someone enough to do terrible things, two elements which can go a long way to endear a protagonist to readers. His pickiness about language and appearance are amusing (I like it when people don’t like too). It’s his relationship with Laura that is most important though. It’s the basis for the story and isn’t very well explored in the first issue. The events surrounding her demise are laid out, but not the reasons why she was so great. To accept a hellish life for five minutes with someone requires a great deal more justification than is provided in the first issue. Their relationship needs exploring, simply being told what he’ll do for her is not enough, but it has the potential to be considered a romance deserving of the “epic” moniker.

The mythos behind the story already feels rich and well considered. The combination of technology and magic is interesting and could have easily felt like a deus ex machina without Joe acting as guide. He skims over what he is doing without bogging the story down in exposition. It’s a good way of explaining the supernatural (think Obi-Wan talking about the Force), when it’s so easy to explore the same subject matter terribly (think midichlorians). The angelic outlines and demons in the basement, beautifully (or horribly, in a good way) illustrated by Ben Templesmith make you want to see more of this landscape, as long as Joe’s there to act as a guide. That’s a good sign, as the same comments could be made about Sam Spade exploring the underbelly of San Francisco.

The story is off to a great start, laying out the premise behind a world that is equal parts fantastical and horrifying, while kicking off the mystery effectively. All of the elements necessary for a good detective story are in place and are paired with a premise which may allow the story to reach for something more sublime than good genre-fiction.

Ben Templesmith is a master of his form. His panels drip with the moment’s mood (usually an unpleasant one). Lighting can be difficult to use effectively in comics, but no one does it better than Templesmith. The lights in this issue alone vary from late night street lamps to neon-emblazoned strip joints, from blazing house fires to the shining light of the heavens. The effect is created not through precise shadows and coloring, but by covering each panel in the essence of the scene. The opening panel literally glows off the page, brighter than some electronic gadgets…

while the strip club lights swirl about in the background, sharp and fake.

In a story like this, place and mood are overwhelmingly important elements to the story. Templesmith’s work sets both perfectly. A bar feels like a bar and a crazy occult den feels like ten types of awful. It adds menace and weight to the story, making it easier to accept the fantastic elements and sympathize with a protagonist who is at best an anti-hero. In good detective fiction, the setting is just as important as any character. Although the city isn’t named, the reader will always know exactly where they are.

“Ten Grand” is ambitious and has the talent to back it up. The worst case scenario is that it will be a good piece of genre-fiction. The best case scenario is tough to imagine. Both of these creators understand the form in which they are working and are capable of writing something outstanding. My recommendation is to buy the ticket, take the ride.

Weekly Checkup – 05/01/2013

I’ll be changing the review format this week in an effort to make the reviews on “Sequential Pictures” more helpful to readers and provide a higher level of quality in analysis. The Weekly Checkup will now be a rapid fire look at many of the books released each week. Each review will be comprised of a couple quick, spoiler-free thoughts and a general recommendation. The Friday Followup will be an in-depth analysis of one or two new releases. These will be designed for people who have read the book and are looking for serious criticism of the art, writing and storytelling in a given issue.

I hope this improves the site and would love to hear any feedback on the change.

Age of Ultron #7

“Age of Ultron” has finally reached the beginning of a story. Seeing alternate versions of beloved characters is always cool, but that’s just about the only positive thing there is to say about this story. So all you need to see is the cover. You’re welcome.
Recommendation: Keep Walking

All-New X-Men #11

Here we have Brian Michael Bendis doing what he does best in his very decompressed style of writing, developing characters. Even though all of the plot has already been revealed in “Uncanny X-Men”, this book continues to be a great read just to see the cast develop.
Recommendation: If you like X-things, read this series.

Earth-Two #12

The vast majority of my enjoyment from this book comes purely from seeing many of my favorite characters, like Jay Garrick. There are some really great spreads of Doctor Fate and other JSA stalwarts, but the dialogue can be clunky and the story tends to drag. However, it’s the only place left to get a JSA fix and it’s not too bad.
Recommendation: JSA fans only.

Green Arrow #20

Lemire wraps up his first arc this week and shows how quickly a bad book can turn good. There’s a lot to like here with an ongoing mystery, great action sequences, and some ominous villains mucking about. The supporting cast may leave something to be desired though. It bares a striking resemblance to WB’s “Arrow”, but it’s still a pretty kick ass adventure.
Recommendation: This is one of the best books at DC. (even if that doesn’t say much currently)

Hawkeye #10

HAWKGUY!
Recommendation: Bro, if you aren’t reading this book, I feel bad, bro.

Snapshot #4

Wow… Why aren’t Andy Diggle and Jock doing more creator-owned work? This was a great mini-series that nailed the ending. It is not for the faint of heart though, as Diggle isn’t pulling punches in a work that is entirely his own. This is definitely a book I’ll buy as a collected volume and I’m anticipating discussing this more on Friday.
Recommendation: Read it, if you’re not buying comics just for superheroes.

Superior Spider-Man #9

Believe the hype, Dan Slott has done it again. This book continues to be one of the more innovative and brave superhero books on the market. Slott knows his characters and allows them to progress the story in a very dramatic fashion. It’s really good stuff and makes you wish more writers at the Big Two had this sort of audacity.
Recommendation: Read this (and all of the tweets between Slott and outraged fans today).

Ten Grand #1

This is a really interesting first installment with absolutely gorgeous art, as always, from Ben Templesmith. It’s part detective noir and part supernatural thriller, but entirely its own story. I look forward to taking a deeper look at this on Friday as well.
Recommendation: If you enjoy “Hellblazer” or “The Dresden Files”, you’ll love this.

The Movement #1

Where the hype on Superior Spider-Man was well earned, it’s just not there on this book. With a cast of misfits and a writer like Gail Simone, it has all the elements that made “Secret Six” great, but the ideas come across muddled. Only time will tell if this issue shows promise or a lack of direction.
Recommendation: Simone fans will probably like it.

Come back on Friday, if you’d like to discuss the finale of “Snapshot” or the debut of “Ten Grand”. I’ll see you then, same sequential time, same sequential station.

Watchmen Babies

It has been more than a year since DC Comics first announced that they would be publishing a collection of mini-series under the “Before Watchmen” banner. Last Wednesday the final issue, “Before Watchmen: Comedian” #6, was released. After all of the debate, interviews, and various angry internet ramblings, it’s now possible to reflect on the value of the series.

This… would have been entertaining, if nothing else.

Alan Moore has made his opinion on the books exceedingly clear,

What I want is for this not to happen.

However, Moore’s opinion doesn’t necessarily matter when considering the value of these books. He is not the grand arbiter of taste (as made clear by his beard) and does not have a legal stake in the books (even if DC Comic’s engaged in some very sketchy deeds to ensure that). Moore’s thoughts are invaluable when evaluating and examining the actual text of “Watchmen”, but that is not the question at hand.

To the same extent, the opinions of the legal owners and caretakers of “Watchmen” are not particularly valuable. Dan DiDio and Jim Lee are not out to make art as publishers at DC Comics, they’re out to make money and just about everything done at the company under their leadership reflects this. Dan DiDio stating that,

DC Comics would only revisit these iconic characters if the creative vision of any proposed new stories matched the quality set by Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons nearly 25 years ago

is sort of like Michael Bay stating,

I would only direct a film about Pearl Harbor that I felt was a true reflection of a soldier’s experience and one which justly recreated the horrors of that terrible day in American history.

That Michael Bay quote wasn’t real, but it still sounded more honest than DiDio’s words.

So what is important? I think the books should be able to speak for themselves as to whether or not they ought to have been published.

The best thing about the “Before Watchmen” titles was a rather outstanding talent pool of creators including Brian Azzarello, Lee Bermejo, Darwyn Cooke, Len Wein, and many more. It was perhaps the single most condensed set of talent to ever be assembled for a line of comic books. With the creative involved, it’s no surprise that many of the books turned out very well from a technical standpoint. The two most prominent successes were “Silk Spectre”, noted for Amanda Conner’s art, and “Minutemen” plotted and written impeccably by Darwyn Cooke. Even the more lackluster titles had standout moments, like the conclusion to “Comedian”, as dark and tonally perfect as anything by Brian Azzarello. If these titles had been written with new characters with no connection to Alan Moore’s “Watchmen”, they would most likely show to be a general success. None of them would be considered classics, but they would be an overall readable and enjoyable set of comics stories. That is not the case though. They were marketed as part of the “Watchmen” story and read, in an obvious way, as such.

The largest downfall of these stories is their connection to a sense of continuity. The characters and setting in which the stories are written have been dictated to the creators. Rorschach is already well established. His life story has been written, his psyche and motives were detailed more than two decades ago. Everything about the character is already known. So any other stories about Rorschach have two available options.

The first is to ignore continuity. This is similar to how new and good stories are written about characters like Batman. They take place outside of an established universe or simply choose to ignore what was previously written. Although many of the elements are the same in Frank Miller’s “The Dark Knight Rises” and Jeph Loeb’s “The Long Halloween”, they are truly about two different characters. These writers were able to put their own unique spin on the character and tell their own stories. This was not the route taken with the “Before Watchmen” titles though.

The second option and the one used in these books is to repeat what has come before. By binding stories to the continuity of a completed work, a writer has to regurgitate the same facts about characters. Events may be added to their lives, where nothing was known before, but the characters are unchangeable. The stories lack any real sense of risk or momentum, because they are written about statues.

A story by Brian Azzarello about Rorschach could have been good. But the one we received added nothing to the character and revealed nothing new, because it was bound to a story that was already complete. For that same reason, there’s absolutely no reason for Brian Azzarello to tell a Rorschach story, when he could just as easily create his own take on a masked vigilante with none of the baggage from “Watchmen”. It’s probably for this same reason that “Minutemen” stands out as the best-written comic in the series. It explores characters that were barely touched upon in the original text.

Of course, these books do nothing to weaken the original text. “Watchmen” still stands as a modern classic of both comics and Western literature. It’s an achievement, one as complex as “Blood Meridian” or “Infinite Jest”. It’s really impossible to remove value from literature. There is a reason that this book made Time’s Top 100 books of the 20th Century and is taught in both college and high school classrooms. There’s also a good reason why the “Before Watchmen” books will never be considered in the same fashion. Literary merit, unlike characters or publication rights, cannot be owned.

Ultimately, the “Before Watchmen” books served no purpose. They told stories about a book which had no more stories to tell. It was created to stand as a unique piece, in Alan Moore’s own words,

Watchmen was something that stood on its own and it had the integrity of a literary work.

To make an apt analogy, if Penguin Publications published a sequel to “Moby Dick”, would it contain any merit? Would it be necessary or enhance the original work? The exact same answer (a resounding no, if you missed the implication) applies to “Before Watchmen”. At best, these books serve the same purpose as “Pride and Prejudice and Zombies”, an amusing take on a classic with no long-term value. No matter how well written or illustrated, fan fiction is still just that, fan fiction.

Reflecting back on the “Before Watchmen” titles, I can’t help but think that as long as a corporation and not the writer possessed the publication rights, they were doomed to be published. After all, Dr. Manhattan made it very clear in my favorite line from the original masterpiece…

Perhaps this time, it should have.