The new Justice League receives four out of five stars from me but nearly only had three. Call it a B- (for those who remember having real grades). The art was dynamic, the first glimpse into this new word intriguing, what characterization there was was enjoyable, but the pacing stinks. It was way too deconstructed. Five pages, six tops, worth of story spread out over an issue. I'm still excited about the new DCU but this wasn't a great start.

 

(copies from my Facebook profile)

Views: 2746

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I used to work with a guy named "Ronald McDonald", and he was just old enough that you knew he was named a few years before the hamburger mascot was created.  He went by "Ron" and would give you the fish-eye if you called him "Ronald".
Patrick's middle name is Raphael.  He was born before the Ninja Turtle craze hit the country, but all the same, most of his friends thought he should be carrying sai.
That's a great book! Very interesting.

Rich Lane said:

Thankfully, they didn't change Bruce's first name back in the 70s when it was considered "unmanly" (David Banner).

 

Names go in and out of style, and there's no telling if the name you pick today will become a joke in ten years.   The book Freakonomics  has a chapter dealing with the rise and fall of popular names that puts it all in perspective.

For this week I've read: The Flash, Fury of the Firestorm, and Green Lantern: New Guardians.

I liked the GL book, it felt like half an issue but I like the initial conflict it presents.

Flash was alright. I liked the art but maybe Flash just isn't my cup of tea. There was nothing wrong with it, it just didn't grab me. I may give it one more issue.

Firestorm didn't work for me at all. I liked the characters in Brightest Day but this made them totally unlikeable.

Week four.  The final 13 (less one, as my LCS got shorted its Teen Titans order).  THE HUMANITY!!!  Anyways...

Picks of the Week:
The Fury of Firestorm: The Nuclear Men: I really liked this one.  They reworked the characters to make them more compelling, not just the obvious ones, some familiar names show up in some unfamiliar places.  There were lots of twists, in fact, the biggest shocker for me wasn’t even the cliffhanger, it was the “Firestorm Protocol” reveal on page 10.  The art was nice.  I’m sold.  I’ll be around for the long haul.
The Flash: I enjoyed it.  Francis Manapul’s art continues to look fantastic.  I quite like the visual of the Flash getting into uniform.  Contrary to my expectations, I like the Patty/Iris/Barry dynamic, and wouldn’t even mind it going a different way this time.  The story’s mostly setup but has a decent amount of action.  One thing I did find a little iffy was Manapul’s non-standard pages, as the double page splash on pages 4 and 5 and the mish mash on page 15, seemed to obscure the storytelling some.  Still, a solid book and a good start.  This is going on my pull.
Voodoo: Yeah, it had lots of cheesecake, but considering it was mostly set in a strip bar, that kind of makes sense.  The characterization was top notch, with even the throwaway characters hitting the mark.  The slow reveal, (which considering it’s set in a strip bar... ;)), really worked well.  My only issue with the comic was that it made the male agent seem realllly stupid to put things out there like that given their suspicions.  (‘Course, maybe stupid was what Marz was going for.)  In any case, I’m intrigued.  The setup was solid, opening lots of possibilities.  I’ll be back for the next issue.

Surprise of the Week:
All Star Western: I’m sure the people that have been reading Jonah Hex wouldn’t consider this a surprise, but I’ll stand by it, as it surprised me that I liked a western.  It had incredibly evocative art that sets one firmly in the time period.  We see one character revealed by his deeds while another was revealed by his thoughts.  There was some nice quick action that moved the story forward, yet it ended with an almost psychological cliffhanger.  This comic delivered.  I opened it expecting a forgettable story and backup, (what did happen to the backup?), in a genre I usually avoid, instead, I found a title I’ll probably follow for a good long while.  Best surprise of the week.

Dregs of the Week:
The Savage Hawkman: Well, I liked the idea that Carter works with a recovery team specializing in alien technology, but that’s pretty much all I liked.  This issue gives rise to lots of questions, but not in a good “I wonder what they’ll do with it” way, more in a “how do they expect this to make sense” way, or even a “what the hell were they thinking” way.  Poor Hawkman, another bad reboot.
Blackhawks: I’m a little hesitant to rip into this one, as again, it’s a genre I’ve never really been interested in; there’s no GI Joe nostalgia here.  Lets just say the Blackhawks didn’t just kill the enemy, they killed my suspension of disbelief as well.

Not My Thing:
Superman: Whereas Action spotlights a Superman I want to read, this is a Superman I’m just not interested in.  Can’t say there’s anything wrong with the art or writing, but this isn’t for me.  BTW, what’s up with the guy blowing the horn on page 8?  Based on this story, I can’t see why this was here instead of in Stormwatch.
I, Vampire: I’ve seen all kinds of good reviews on this but I didn’t find anything in it compelling.  If anything, I’d say that Andrew Bennett is now less differentiated from the mainstream than he was before.  I’ll just say, not my cup of blood, and move on.
Batman: The Dark Knight: Another Bat book.  Another Wayne announcement.  Another fight in Arkham.  While the art is nice, the IA agent is a caricature and Two Face is completely wasted.  I think I’ll stick with Snyder’s Batman book, thanks.

On the Fence:
Aquaman: The art is nice, the setup has potential, but the only things that happened in this issue, right down to the characterization beats, were teased in the headlines of Johns’ interviews at Newsarama and CBR, you didn’t even have to open them.  I’m not sure why I should buy a comic if skimming a news site is going to give me the whole story.
Green Lantern: New Guardians: This comic perplexes me.  Who thought that starting the comic with a completely different status quo, and not even marking it as being in the past (except by comparison), would be a good introduction to this comic?  Once we get to the present day, I like what I see, but it’s all setup... and it doesn’t even feel like we got the complete setup.  I’ll probably give this another issue, but it better get moving quick.
Justice League Dark: I had high hopes for this one.  There wasn’t anything wrong with it, per se, however after finishing it, I was left feeling vaguely disappointed.  Nothing really grabbed me.  The two things that stood out were Zatanna being less interesting than in the old U and Wonder Woman’s costume being ostensibly the same but having a very different look than her own book.  I’ll probably give the next issue a try; maybe I’ll be able to judge it more fairly as I won’t be expecting as much from it.

Overall, a pretty strong week in a very strong month.  I think DC, despite the occasional stumble, has done a good job setting up their new status quo.  I’m looking forward to seeing how things play out over the next few months.

Yeah, it had lots of cheesecake, but considering it was mostly set in a strip bar, that kind of makes sense.

 

Well, as an alien with no long term memory (or was it short term), who carries herself like a playboy centrefold at all times and puts out indiscriminately for any man who crosses her path, Starfire made sense too, but that's not quite the point...

 

It's the decision to make Starfire like that which is the problem, and likewise someone decided that one of the DC's new superheroes would be a stripper.  The two decisions can't be looked at in isolation from each other or from the general culture within DC. 

 

I tried to get All-Star Western this week but it was sold out.  I love westerns, but so far the only Western series I've collected properly was The Kents way back in the day.  I might give Jonah a shot for a while.

Not sure if it makes you feel any better, but...

 

SPOILERS for VOODOO!

 

 

 

 

 

...she quits her job by the end of the issue.

Figserello said:


It's the decision to make Starfire like that which is the problem, and likewise someone decided that one of the DC's new superheroes would be a stripper.  The two decisions can't be looked at in isolation from each other or from the general culture within DC. 

Throw off the shackles of oppression, Sister!

 

She'll probably have forgotten her purse or something in the second issue so that she has to go back, and the artist has to draw all those naked women again...

It's the decision to make Starfire like that which is the problem, and likewise someone decided that one of the DC's new superheroes would be a stripper.  The two decisions can't be looked at in isolation from each other or from the general culture within DC.

Except my understanding is that the character has always been a stripper.  I guess it could be argued they might have changed that for the relaunch but to me, that screams of white washing.  It also leads to the question as to which professions are acceptable to use and which we should just pretend don't exist. Why would a stripper be any less acceptable than a hitman?

 

Personally, I thought Marz did a very good job showing that the strippers weren't just pieces of meat.  If you had new teen readers, they might come in for the titillation but be influenced by the fact that the women had their own concerns, including different female characters with different viewpoints.  That's a hell of a lot more than I can say about Catwoman.

 

DC's new relaunch does have a lot of questionable content.  What really amazes me is that everyone seems focused on the objectification of women to the virtual exclusion of the degree of violence in the new books.  As I see it, people seem to be excusing the violence, as all the books are listed T or above, but any books having a sex appeal factor don't get the same benefit of the doubt.  Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that because we have one, the other is acceptable, I just find it curious that virtually all the books have the violence ramped up, while only some of the books featuring women are treating them as sex objects, yet the outcry is almost exclusively about the latter.

 

This also begs the question, should DC abandon some demographic markets?  A lot has been made of focusing on whether the new comics are new reader friendly.  It seems like DC is trying to reach out to many different tastes, while still bringing it back to their bread and butter, super heroes.  Many people are arguing that they're not succeeding very well, as there aren't that many comics that would really attract female readers; the diversity is still woefully lacking, with only a couple of headliners that are Hispanic, LGBT, etc.; there aren't that many examples of other genres; etc.  Whereas things can always be improved upon, it seems to me like the DCnU is trying to provide something for as many different tastes as possible (within their context).  Like it or not, hormone flooded teen male is one of the demographics DC is trying to appeal to.  Because other demographics might find it offensive, is it something they should abandon?

 

 

Wow, my last response is all over the place.  Guess I shouldn't post when I'm all medded up. :)

Ah well...

Figserello said:

Throw off the shackles of oppression, Sister!

 

She'll probably have forgotten her purse or something in the second issue so that she has to go back, and the artist has to draw all those naked women again...


The character is not, strictly speaking, a "she."


"Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read." -Groucho Marx

Check out the Secret Headquarters (my store) website! Comics and Games for Everyone!

I used to listen to WOXY.com; It was the future of rock-n-roll! RIP WOXY




Border Mutt said:

Wow, my last response is all over the place.  Guess I shouldn't post when I'm all medded up. :)

Ah well...


No, that's a fine reply.

I'd argue that DC should ignore women (even women not strictly speaking a "she" ;-p) who happen to work as strippers, so long as they are open to the accusation of predominantly viewing women for their value as sexual objects. Thanks to how they portray women across the rest of their line, they haven't earned the right to set whole issues in strip clubs. Each and every insulting depiction of women in DC comics (or Marvel comics) can be excused as 'there are women like this' (or even "there could be aliens like this!"), but when the predominant pattern across the board is of women only being valued as eye-candy and objects of lust whose only purpose is to satisfy the male gaze, then people have the right to object to each new manifestation of this. It's not the single instance they are objecting to, but its place in the pattern.

Creators should be aware of the pattern (the comics culture), and able to decide for themselves if they want to be perpetuating it, or working to change it.

Here's Ty Templeton's critique from of the new 52 Catwoman and Starfire characterisations. (via Colin Smith)

 

I've always been amazed at how uptight US culture is about sex while loving violence.  Even US kids' cartoons are awash with beatings and gunplay.  There's a reading of the situation which says that US culture wants to sublimate the sexual impulse into a violence impulse, in order to normalise violence and war.  (When was the last time the US wasn't at war?)  Thus young men happily make war not love.  It kinda makes sense.

Reply to Discussion

RSS

Welcome!

No flame wars. No trolls. But a lot of really smart people.The Captain Comics Round Table tries to be the friendliest and most accurate comics website on the Internet.

SOME ESSENTIALS:

RULES OF THE ROUND TABLE

MODERATORS

SMILIES FOLDER

TIPS ON USING THE BOARD

FOLLOW US:

OUR COLUMNISTS:

Groups

© 2020   Captain Comics, board content ©2013 Andrew Smith   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service