Rated R Reviews: Siege #1

It's difficult to call Siege #1 a good comic or a absolute failure despite it being both at the same time. Have you read anything about Siege wherein the basic concept is explained? Then you've read the first issue. "Norman Osborn and company invade Asgard after he stages a disaster to make Asgard look like a threat." That's the concept of the whole crossover and it's also the content of the first issue. I just saved you four bucks. Literally nothing else happens. It happens in more detail and those details are presented well, but that's it. The concept is the content.

Does that make this a bad comic? Well, yeah. And no. I guess it depends on how you approach it: as a single issue or the first issue in a story. As a single issue, this one fails as it feels like a letdown providing nothing I didn't already know about the project. Instead of blowing me away and increasing my excitement, I was left underwhelmed and feeling a little cheated. I repeat: nothing happens that I didn't learn for free from the publisher and writer ahead of time. Nothing.

But, Bendis needs to set the story up and that means laying out the concept. He could have rushed it and crammed it into the first five pages just to move on, but that wouldn't have been any better. It's like this first issue is disappointing by necessity. It's a necessary component of the larger story, so we have to suck it up and deal with spending four bucks on a comic that offers nothing we didn't already know (assuming you're the type to pay attention to interviews... otherwise, I guess this doesn't actually apply to you... unless you heard the concept at all going into it). Is this the best way to kick off an event? Not at all as most of my excitement and enthusiasm is gone (and despite my cynical 'too cool for school' front, I was excited -- I spent 24 hours on Bendis's Avengers work this past summer, so it's clear where my interests lie). It's like hearing the concept of a TV show and the pilot simply spells out that concept while offering little new information. Years later, it will work better when put together with what follows, but right now? Horrible.

Siege #1 is presented with skill and confidence, but is so unsurprising that it left me bored. The concept is the content.

Rated R Reviews: Absolution #3

Absolution #3: Think of this as the other side of New Avengers #58 where a hero kills and, yet, it's just as simplistic and vaguely insulting to the intelligence. That's not to say that I don't enjoy Absolution, but it does very little to actually explore that dark grey area where the hero kills. He does it, he stresses over people finding out, he continues doing it, a villain gets involved, he's got a patsy. Not exactly insightful. What it does get right is John Dusk not just killing murderers. My biggest issue with capital punishment is, honestly, not the sanctity of life -- since that's something I've never really believed in as an absolute, preferring to defend the quality of life not life itself -- but that it's only applied to murder, a crime that doesn't top my list of the worst thing someone can do. It's theft on a grand stage, but it's a crime that, ultimately, harms those around the victim more as they feel the loss and pain where the victim doesn't anymore. So, it's built up as bigger, as justice for the family and friends. Now, I can only imagine, but rape has always struck me as far more damaging to the victim who lives on with the memories of that experience... that's always seemed worse, more damaging. And, yet, that crime is barely discussed on the same level as murder (though the disparity has gotten better over the past decade or so)... I can understand why, but it's never seemed right to me that something so damaging to the victim that it acts as continuing attack, a continuing level of pain and suffering should be downplayed... I do like that Dusk goes after rapists, seeing them as just as evil and worthless as murderers. I do wish that this book was more nuanced, as well. It's the example that going the other way isn't always better, it's just the same thing.

Rated R Reviews: Secret Warriors #9

Secret Warriors #9: I remember when I loved this book quite a bit. Wait, that was only two or three issues ago... what? This issue isn't bad, but it doesn't have anything that really grabs me. I'm still wondering how Alex and Ares's relationship here meshes with that issue of Dark Avengers where Ares follows him to Fury's base... The end of the issue also lacks a lot of drama or purpose because we've all read that "List" issue that completes that particular plot. Nice job, Marvel.

But, questions beyond this book:

Is it just me or are the Dark Avengers really bad at fighting? Have they won a fight against anyone yet? Everytime they show up, they get their asses handed to them. Now, here, it makes sense, because these kids are trained by Nick Fury to kick ass. But still... how effective is that group when they can't beat anyone? That's why you don't hire villains as your superhero team: you're hiring losers.

The constant jobbing out of Bullseye/Hawkeye... doesn't that just make Daredevil look like a wimp? His arch-enemy gets his ass handed to him on a regular basis -- where does that put Daredevil as far as skill goes? Can Yo-Yo or American Eagle beat up Daredevil?

Not beyond the book, but going back to my New Avengers review... why doesn't Daisy use her powers to kill Osborn here? She clearly has the abilities and the right attitude... I hate comics sometimes. Norman Osborn (and most other characters) should be dead many times over.

Otherwise, this issue just didn't click for me. Still better than most of what's published.

Rated R Reviews: Detective Comics #858

Detective Comics #858: Jog did it already.

Rated R Reviews: New Avengers #58

New Avengers #58: Yeah, here's the thing: not killing bad guys doesn't make you better than them, it makes you a fucking pussy. It makes you responsible for everything negative they do after that point. No grey areas, no moral questions, no debates about what's heroic and what's not. You see a person who will make the world a worse place by simply existing, someone who will actively prevent you from making it better, and you've got the chance to take them out, you do it. This coming from a pacifist. I hate superhero comics for pretending that letting villains live is somehow the morally superior thing to do, because it's not. You know what the morally superior thing is? Knowing when killing is the moral thing to do. In their lifestyle, just killing is immoral and never killing is immoral. They're both extremes, neither of which actually attempt to fit into the reality of the situation. Should they kill every mugger ala the Punisher? No. Should they kill Norman Osborn when the chance arises? Um, yeah. Even it means Peter Parker whines like an infant for two weeks.

I don't blame Bendis, but that's how things are. Fighting against the slippery slope, making tough, nuanced decisions, and sticking to them... that's heroism. Giving a guy a fucking spanking and then acting like that will stop him from hurting hundreds of people in six months again and again... that's the definition of insanity.

Rated R Reviews: Spider-Man: The Clone Saga #2

Spider-Man: The Clone Saga #2: This comic is very fucking bad. You all know that I'm not one to keep buying a piece of shit comic, but I will with this one, because I'm curious to see how this plays out. A retelling of the Spider-Clone Saga in six issues... if three years was too fucking long, six issues is too fucking short. I pity anyone who doesn't know the original story, because this is that story on fast forward with no explanations. What's that, Ben Reilly is in a whole new costume all of a sudden and has new web-themed weapons? Okay! Kaine has apparently been attacking Peter and Ben frequently? If you say so, Mr Writers!

What I can't figure out is, why publish this? Not the project itself, I can see the appeal there (mostly because it's that very appeal that has me plunking down $24 to read the whole thing), but why publish this if you're not going to do a good job? What is the point of "Doing the Spider-Clone Saga right, as it was originally intended" if you're going to rush through it and deliver nothing but the highlights? That's not the story 'done right,' that's a goddamn illustrated summary. I guess they figure the only people buying this will know the story already and be able to fill in the blanks and have it all make sense -- and we can. But, really, this is a bad comic. Worse than the first issue.

I should just drop this shit now.

Rated R Review: The Unwritten #6

The Unwritten #6: While The Unwritten is quickly becoming one of my favourite monthly comics, it does take an approach to English literature that I'm not sure I fully support -- particularly in its storytelling. It's too early to really comment on the series as a whole, but it's strongly pushing the idea of allusion as storytelling. Of taking existing works and basing a new story around them. It's not a new idea, but it's one that's really taken off in the past decade or so. In my creative writing class at grad school, the prof talked about how allusion creates resonance in the story and it does, but there's also an element of laziness in it. Frankenstein shows up at the end of this issue and that's fine, that's great, we all know who Frankenstein is, so Carey can play off our expectations... but it's also a case where he doesn't have to really work at it either. (He will, no doubt...) The character is there, we all know it, that's half the battle done for him. Then again, are modern superhero comics any different? Are they nothing more than fan fiction built upon allusion? How is this series any different other than referencing different characters and works? Take X-Men Legacy, a book that was based upon the idea of delving into the past and using those existing ideas to create stories that people will, supposedly, want to read... it all leads to a question: Can Mike Carey write an original work? Something that doesn't require an existing framework, existing characters, a whole literature canon... from my understanding, Lucifer is heavily indebted to Paradise Lost as well... The tougher question: is Carey alone in his reliance on what has come before? They say that there are no new ideas... but have we all taken that as law? Have we all given up and decided to play inside baseball for the rest of our lives? Remakes, relaunches, allusions, updates... Some of the greatest works have been created this way, but, goddamn, isn't it getting a little out of hand? I honestly liked The Unwritten more when Frankenstein was a fictional character that was referenced for thematic purposes in issue three. That was interesting. Are we reliving the past through entertainment? Or is it just part of the grand tradition of retelling stories, each new retelling adding its own spin? Am I expecting too much?

Fuck, I hate it when all I have are questions and few answers.

Rated R Review: Gødland #0029

Gødland #0029: I've always liked how the numbering on the cover of Gødland begins with two zeros. It seemed optimistic and bold, like Casey and Scioli were telling us all that fuck yes this comic will reach issue 1000. It won't, of course, since it's ending, like, seven issues from now. Does that make Casey and Scioli liars? Yeah. Yes, it does. But who cares...

Two or eight things stood out to me in this issue: the butterfly from Automatic Kafka makes an appearance. Maybe it's not the same butterfly, because a lot of butterflies look alike, but it's all yellow-orange in the same way -- and it reveals truths like the one from Kafka. For what purposes, I don't know, because repeating the end of Automatic Kafka wouldn't really work here... unless it's a different butterfly. But, then, why reuse the butterfly? And why haven't I written about Automatic Kafka yet? Hardly a day goes by without two dozen e-mails pleading with me to finally (FINALLY!) sit down and break that series open, exposing its naughty intellectual bits to you all... but, nah, not now, I'm tired.

Kadeem Hardison's cameo both made me geek out and cringe -- first, of all the African-American actors Casey could have selected, choosing Dwayne Wayne himself is fantastic. I know I'm not the only one who's seen every episode of A Different World -- how the fuck did he end up with Whitley, by the way? But, why Kadeem Hardison? Does Casey think that he's the man to play Barack Obama in an eventual movie? And, then there's the problem where Tom Scioli's drawing doesn't actually look like Hardison... but, an odd choice. Unless it's an example of a somewhat obscure popculture reference to add that little bit of cultural cache that Casey sometimes throws in. Still, now I can't get past the idea of a Kadeem Hardison/Jasmine Guy reunion to play the Obamas... I'd see that movie, but I may be the only one.

Another good issue of Gødland, although it is always dangerously close to sinking under the weight of the numerous subplots its advancing. It hasn't yet, but, damn, there are, like, five plots running in this issue. That final page is nice, too.

Rated R Reviews: Anna Mercury 2 #2

Anna Mercury 2 #2: I have no desire to fuck Anna Mercury. Why do I feel the need to tell you that? Where did I go wrong in my life where I find myself feeling the urge to proclaim online that I don't want to have sex with a comic book character? But when a comic has this cover, you feel the need to declare your intentions not to come up with a manner to enter the fictional universe she inhabits with the goal of sweaty sex:



I feel the need to declare this, because this cover has very little to do with what happens in the comic. Say what you will about Avatar, but their covers are shit more often than not. And the cool covers, like those warning sign Doktor Sleepless ones? Cost more. Fuck off with that bullshit. Give me a decent cover that isn't just a fucking pin-up, dammit. I'm kind of surprised about that since, usually, Ellis is somewhat involved with the cover designs of his books, usually eschewing the shitty pin-up look if he can -- unless that's the point.

Then again, is the comic entirely divorced from the cover when it stars another Ellis action star female lead that some speculate on regarding his preference for women of that sort but I won't (I'll merely suggest that others speculate since that does the job while leaving me some factor of deniability -- totally the coward's way out)... I find Anna Mercury grating and annoying in this issue when she just won't shut up about having a ray gun. She travels to satellite planets and saves them on a semi-regular basis but goes gaga over a ray gun? Ray guns are cool and all, but they're not babble on like a moron every third panel cool.

The best part of this issue is Facundo Percio's depiction of Anna after she escapes her captors -- the crazed look in her eyes is fantastic. He nails that, telling us more about her state of mind than anything else in the issue. Also, Ellis is always good at coming up with different cultures and highlighting how they think differently from us.

The end: vikings. Yawn. I hate this age of awesome we live in. Total bullshit.

Rated R Reviews: Marvels Project #3

[Screw the "I bought comics" posts, I'm doing short, small reviews when I want. This is the first. It isn't all that different per se or anything, but it's what I feel like doing right now.]

The Marvels Project #3: Not so much a story as an attempt at creating a cohesive whole out of random bits spewed out by young men who thought that today's work would be forgotten tomorrow. Little did they know that, 70 years later, we would still be obsessing over it, mining it for all that we can to give order and sense to what passes for our entertainment. Revisionist history, an attempt to take free-flowing ideas and stories, to make them fit into a small box as we trim them down, organise them, transform each into a piece of a puzzle that we'll now assemble for no reason other than someone gave it to us and that's what you do with puzzles: you assemble them. Then, you look at the picture created, say a nice word or two, and rip it apart, stick it in a box and never look at it again. Because though it is a nice picture and the task of assembling it is pleasant, it's not real, and it doesn't hold up next to the things we actually care about. It's idle exercise, something to pass the time... and what better way to pass the time in comics than to rob and steal from the past? No, not so much a story as an intellectual exercise in puzzle-making.