Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Thad]

It's pretty much Age of Apocalypse, isn't it?

I dunno, the only one I picked up was Frankenstein.

[Royal☭]

Zara

You're reading a DC event book.

Please seek medical attention immediately.

[Zaratustra]

I'm bored

also I picked up all of Locke & Key and it is awesome. it's like a cross of warehouse 13 with lemony snicket. you should all read it all

[Büge]

A thoughtful essay on DC's decision to change Oracle back to Batgirl

[Büge]

An interview with the girl who asked Dan Didio questions at SDCC

[Thad]

Just finished League of Extraordinary Gentlemen: Century: 1969.  It has some of O'Neill's most gorgeous work.  As for the story, I'm still trying to decide how I feel about it, but one thing's clear: Alan Moore is full of shit.

Moore spends every interview he does griping about how he'll never do superheroes again and how sad it is that everything's all grim-'n'-gritty and nobody does anything light and fun.

Well, first of all, League is a goddamn superhero book.  Dress it up however the hell you want, it's a superhero team, whether they wear tights or not.  (And incidentally, Mina does in fact wear a damn superhero costume in this one.)

Also, Moore's continual griping about what a horrible thing he did in The Killing Joke is somewhat undercut by scenes like [spoiler]Mina getting straight-up molested by Tom Riddle[/spoiler].

Seriously.  I understand what he's doing here, and why the book had to end on the note it did, but...it's all a bit too far.  Not nearly as nasty as Neonomicon, of course, but still...just feels like he's going for shock value here.

[Lottel]

WARNING: Don't read the news until WEDNESDAY. The New Spider-man has been announced to news sources.
Read it here, if you want spoiled

I find it a bit silly that comic fans keep getting the biggest news spoiled by major news outlets. You didn't see USA Today's frontpage ever being DUMBLEDORE DIES or something. But this is an old complaint.

Also, it SEEMS like they want to make this permanent (as permanent as these things get nowadays, anyway).
I can see it sticking until the new Ultimate Spider-man cartoon get's announced at least. I'm actually hoping it's permanent. I love USM's Peter but the idea they can get rid of Peter Parker in a Spider-man comic is an interesting one. The Ultimate Universe revolves around Spider-man though, so we'll see how this works, I guess.

No spoiler tags in this post because Death of Spider-man and him being replaced is two years old by now, right? I figure if you didn't know he died, you've been away for long enough you need something to get you back in. Maybe a minor "spoiler" would help.

[Mongrel]

I don't care about the spoiler, so it's okay, but I had no idea they killed off Peter Parker.

Of course, after all the Quesada bullshit, maybe they were just putting him out of his misery.

[Lottel]

Wrong Spider-man! Ultimate Spider-man is the 16 year-old one from the Ultimate line. He and Mary Jane weren't even dating.

[Lottel]

Fuck it. Spoiler time:

[spoiler]Italian artist Sara Pichelli, who was integral in designing the new Spider-Man's look, says, "Maybe sooner or later a black or gay — or both — hero will be considered something absolutely normal." [/spoiler]

[spoiler]
Some people (read excitable morons) believe this to mean that the new guy is gay. It'd be interesting, but I doubt that's the case. I'd say that's TOO much they're doing. Killing one of the biggest names in comics is one thing, but to replace him with a gay guy? There is no way that'd stick. People will already be upset at the replacement, don't get homophobes in on the trashing Marvel. It'd be interesting to see a big name be openly gay though, but I don't think that'll happen through Spidey. [/spoiler]

Also, I was thinking about something that hit just now, leaving me with a few predictions. [spoiler]Miles will be first appearing in Peter's costume and will be seen by people who knew Peter. Then he'll get his own costume. After his death, Peter Parker Spider-man is a national hero and loved by all. The new guy stepping in will be seen with a lot of hate, I'm guessing. Which will keep him true to the Spider-man form but with a rather nice twist. I can't wait to see what JJJ, who just came around to loving begrudingly accepting  loving Peter, does with this new Spider-man. He'll probably menace-ize the new guy and say he's spoiling the image of the original or something but maybe he's learned his lesson and treats the new guy as a hero? [/spoiler]

Ok. I'm done until Wednesday, at least.

[Ted Belmont]

Just finished League of Extraordinary Gentlemen: Century: 1969.  It has some of O'Neill's most gorgeous work.  As for the story, I'm still trying to decide how I feel about it, but one thing's clear: Alan Moore is full of shit.

Moore spends every interview he does griping about how he'll never do superheroes again and how sad it is that everything's all grim-'n'-gritty and nobody does anything light and fun.

Well, first of all, League is a goddamn superhero book.  Dress it up however the hell you want, it's a superhero team, whether they wear tights or not.  (And incidentally, Mina does in fact wear a damn superhero costume in this one.)

Also, Moore's continual griping about what a horrible thing he did in The Killing Joke is somewhat undercut by scenes like [spoiler]Mina getting straight-up molested by Tom Riddle[/spoiler].

Seriously.  I understand what he's doing here, and why the book had to end on the note it did, but...it's all a bit too far.  Not nearly as nasty as Neonomicon, of course, but still...just feels like he's going for shock value here.

I've also heard it said that the story itself takes a backseat to cramming as many literary references as possible. Chris Sims said it was "Family Guy for smart people".

[Mongrel]

Oh was it just Ultimate Spidey they killed?

[Büge]

Just finished League of Extraordinary Gentlemen: Century: 1969.  It has some of O'Neill's most gorgeous work.  As for the story, I'm still trying to decide how I feel about it, but one thing's clear: Alan Moore is full of shit.

Moore spends every interview he does griping about how he'll never do superheroes again and how sad it is that everything's all grim-'n'-gritty and nobody does anything light and fun.

Well, first of all, League is a goddamn superhero book.  Dress it up however the hell you want, it's a superhero team, whether they wear tights or not.  (And incidentally, Mina does in fact wear a damn superhero costume in this one.)

Also, Moore's continual griping about what a horrible thing he did in The Killing Joke is somewhat undercut by scenes like [spoiler]Mina getting straight-up molested by Tom Riddle[/spoiler].

Seriously.  I understand what he's doing here, and why the book had to end on the note it did, but...it's all a bit too far.  Not nearly as nasty as Neonomicon, of course, but still...just feels like he's going for shock value here.

Actually, it felt like the whole book was structured like a bad acid trip (if there's one thing Alan Moore knows, it's mind-expanding drugs). There's a gradual buildup of intensity in colour and sensation, but it starts to accelerate and go too far, culminating in a crash and burnout.

[Zaratustra]

Just finished League of Extraordinary Gentlemen: Century: 1969.  It has some of O'Neill's most gorgeous work.  As for the story, I'm still trying to decide how I feel about it, but one thing's clear: Alan Moore is full of shit.

Moore spends every interview he does griping about how he'll never do superheroes again and how sad it is that everything's all grim-'n'-gritty and nobody does anything light and fun.

Well, first of all, League is a goddamn superhero book.  Dress it up however the hell you want, it's a superhero team, whether they wear tights or not.  (And incidentally, Mina does in fact wear a damn superhero costume in this one.)

Also, Moore's continual griping about what a horrible thing he did in The Killing Joke is somewhat undercut by scenes like [spoiler]Mina getting straight-up molested by Tom Riddle[/spoiler].

Seriously.  I understand what he's doing here, and why the book had to end on the note it did, but...it's all a bit too far.  Not nearly as nasty as Neonomicon, of course, but still...just feels like he's going for shock value here.

Well it's pretty minimal rape (like we were talking in the channels, it's a rape-lite) when compared to, well, pretty much every other issue of LEG.

The most annoying thing is the sheer amount of sex. It's like, sex, sex, sex, gay sex, vampire sex, lesbian sex, sex, sex, talk about sex, man-on-hermaphrodite sex, sex. Even for Alan Moore, this is excessive and completely distracts from anything else that might be going on. It's like trying to read the newspaper in a strip show, you get distracted off both things and can't do either properly.

Also, the references are all both old and British, so most readers are gonna be completely confused. If they have to take half the references off to get Century 2009 out earlier, it'll be unnoticeable.

Also: [spoiler]if Voldemort is the newest reincarnation of Aleister Crowley/Oliver Haddo, does that mean Harry Potter is the Moonchild?[/spoiler]

(THAD EDIT: Spoiler tagged, even though it's a pretty obvious twist.)

[Büge]

Oh hey, they actually killed Tarot...

in the most hilariously gruesome way!

[Mongrel]

So, what you guys are saying is that Alan Moore is well past his sell-by date?

I, uh, can't say I'm surprised.

[Zaratustra]

I wouldn't say that, I'd just say it's time he gets over his mid-age crisis. Though I can't quite recall any comic writers that have done so successfully.

[Büge]

Is 57 'middle age' now?

[Thad]

I can see it sticking until the new Ultimate Spider-man cartoon get's announced at least. I'm actually hoping it's permanent.

I was actually disappointed when they confirmed that animated USM was going to be Peter.  Because really, it'd be a pretty neat trick if he wasn't.

I've also heard it said that the story itself takes a backseat to cramming as many literary references as possible. Chris Sims said it was "Family Guy for smart people".

I haven't read Sims's review yet (just about to), but I think he's missed the point.  He's right that the story isn't there, and that the obscure literary references are a mile a minute, but I think he's incorrect in assuming that the story isn't there BECAUSE the obscure literary references are a mile a minute.  The series has always played with that.

The reason the story isn't there is that Moore's entirely focused on the tone of it.  It's about the end of the 1960's, the world spinning out of control, and Mina herself desperately trying to fit in with a world that's changed around her.  And yes, the last half of the book is a bad trip.

It is, of course, also the second act of a trilogy, so it doesn't have a happy ending.

Actually, it felt like the whole book was structured like a bad acid trip (if there's one thing Alan Moore knows, it's mind-expanding drugs). There's a gradual buildup of intensity in colour and sensation, but it starts to accelerate and go too far, culminating in a crash and burnout.

Well, yes.  But what I'm saying is that Moore goes beyond that and into nasty-for-the-sake-of-nasty (and with [spoiler]a character from a series of children's books[/spoiler], to boot, not that that's a new thing for him).

Well it's pretty minimal rape (like we were talking in the channels, it's a rape-lite) when compared to, well, pretty much every other issue of LEG.

Granted, this is a series that started out with Polyanna being raped by the Invisible Man, but that doesn't really excuse it.  Moore's not treading any new ground here, he's spinning the same wheels he has been for years; at least in Lost Girls and Neonomicon it seemed like there was a point to it, but here it doesn't even really serve the story.  The story already ends with [spoiler]Mina having a nervous breakdown and hallucinating that Dracula's coming after her again[/spoiler], and Haddo makes a reference to the bit with Griffin in vol 2. 

The most annoying thing is the sheer amount of sex. It's like, sex, sex, sex, gay sex, vampire sex, lesbian sex, sex, sex, talk about sex, man-on-hermaphrodite sex, sex. Even for Alan Moore, this is excessive and completely distracts from anything else that might be going on. It's like trying to read the newspaper in a strip show, you get distracted off both things and can't do either properly.

Yeah, but...1969.

Also, the references are all both old and British, so most readers are gonna be completely confused. If they have to take half the references off to get Century 2009 out earlier, it'll be unnoticeable.

I didn't get most of them but I didn't find them distracting either.  I'm going to poke through some annotations here shortly, but I think Moore's right when he says he shouldn't have to tone down the references for Americans -- that he read Mad Magazine growing up and they never bothered to explain who Adlai Stevenson was.

But yeah, generally I found that the story still worked even without knowing who everybody was -- and I've always liked the little Easter Eggs (like the Diabolik ref).

Also: [spoiler]if Voldemort is the newest reincarnation of Aleister Crowley/Oliver Haddo, does that mean Harry Potter is the Moonchild?[/spoiler]

Hm.  It certainly fits.

Wonder who else'll show up.  Moore's already made repeated reference to Jack Bauer at least getting mentioned, and given that he's a South Park fan I'm guessing the boys will at least put in a cameo.

[Thad]

Re: Spider-Man.  And I'm going to drop the spoiler tags now, because it's unlikely that there's anybody left who doesn't know at this point.

Byrne brings up a valid point, in his own extremely John Byrne way:

More creative bankruptcy. Remember the Black Panther? Remember Luke Cage?

Somewhere along the line -- and, sadly, it's not recent -- Black characters at Marvel suddenly were only allowed if they adopted the names of existing characters. Iron Man. Captain Marvel. Giant-Man (who'd begun with the staggeringly original name "Black Goliath"). Nick Fury. Now, a Black Spider-Man.

I'll admit to having created only a handful of Black characters, but at least NONE of them were forced to follow in some White guy's footsteps.

Aren't Black audiences weary yet of this modern-day Minstrel Show?

And that got me wondering: what non-legacy superheroes HAVE gained mainstream popularity in the past 20 years?

Here's what I came up with:

Static
Spawn
Hellboy
The Tick

Gray areas:
Blade (created in the 1970's, got a movie in the 1990's)
Savage Dragon (had a cartoon, I don't think it was that popular)
Mysterymen (had a movie, ditto)
Kick-Ass (ditto, and as the most recent it's a bit early to tell what its staying power will be)
New Teen Titans (not sure if this counts as "non-legacy"; Starfire, Raven, and Cyborg are non-legacy characters explicitly created for a legacy team book)

First of all, it's interesting to note the number of minority characters on the list.

Second, it's also quite interesting to note just how many of those are creator-owned.  (Or at least were originally.  Does DC own Static outright now?)  I think, as much as anything, that points out the real inertia in the Big Two -- it's not that people aren't creating new characters for them; they are, all the time.  But I think people who read DC and Marvel are probably less likely to buy books featuring new characters.  And even out of the ones who become popular, it's rare for any to be worth the risk of a jump to TV, let alone film.  (Though if the Deadpool movie gets made, he'll go on the list too.)

Blade's the real outlier; he's an obscure 1970's character revived for a film franchise a couple of decades later, right as Marvel was coming off of bankruptcy and right after Batman and Robin poisoned the well for superhero movies.  It was a comparably low-budget, low-risk venture -- and so were most of the rest of the movies/shows on this list.

So, people ARE making new shit.  And a handful are making POPULAR new shit.  But most of those are doing it outside the DC/Marvel framework.