Wednesday Number Ones is a weekly feature here at Comic Pants. We take the books that are premiering a first issue from that week and give a quick opinion on them. From time to time we may also include more than issue number ones in this feature. If a noteworthy one-shot or the first issue of a new story arc is released, we may talk about it in this feature.
This week we will cover Bakers Meet Jingle Belle, Civil War: War Crimes #1, Criminal Macabre Two Red Eyes #1, Darkness Level 0 #1, Iron Man/Captain America: Casualties Of War #1, Maintenance #1, New Avengers Illuminati #1 of 5, Starship Troopers Damaged Justice #1 of 4, Walk In #1 of 5 and Warhammer 40k #1 of 6.
Dave Farabee Read and Thought:
Starship Troopers: Damaged Justice #1 of 4 (Markosia): Whew, rough stuff. Plot involves a revenge scheme from a soldier drummed out of the service, action’s weak, art is an amateurish mixture of Byrne and McFarlane, and the few inspired moments are derived from Heinlein’s book stuff that didn’t make it into the movie (the talking bombs and the neodogs). For diehards only.
Maintenance #1 (Oni Press): I’m not much for schticky premises, so “janitors at a supervillain lab” isn’t the kind of concept that instantly wins me over. Aaaaaaand…the execution did nothing to change my mind. At best, it reaches the Peter David school of schtick or the better moments of Austin Powers 3, and there are a few instances of good comic timing, but most of the times its all the easy gags you’d expect. Robbi Rodriguez is a definite asset, providing the appealing, cartoony visuals, though even those were weakened by the book’s gray tones. Mad scientist schtick needs color.
New Avengers: Illuminati #1 of 5 (Marvel Comics): It’s the first in a series of untold tales retconning Brian Bendis’ secret cabal of big thinker/leader types (Professor X, Dr. Strange, Iron Man, Namor, Mr. Fantastic, and Black Bolt) into notable events of Marvel’s history. This time out’s the Kree/Skrull War, and continuity and superhero morality are casually trod upon in a manner that should be familiar to anyone reading Marvel’s Civil War. (Slaughtering aliens is “in”, for instance.) If you’re cool with that, well…there’s still the weak writing to contend with. Bendis’ fingerprints are all over this, from Skrulls quipping like standard Bendis characters to a flimsy plot that’s mostly an excuse to give the “Illuminati” members a series of badass moments. Jim Cheung’s art is quite nice, though. Wasted, but nice.
David Martindale Read and Thought:
Civil War: War Crimes #1 (Marvel Comics): Good God. War Crimes indeed; this might be the worst Civil War book I’ve read so far, and that’s saying a lot. Poor in concept AND execution. Am I seriously supposed to believe that Tony Stark wasn’t familiar with the fact that the U.S. government worked with the Italian mob in World War II until the Kingpin told him about it? And that’s the least of the atrocities. The heroes fighting each other is bad enough; the pro-reg faction working with the villains is worse; this issue takes it one more step beyond even that. I can’t blame writer Frank Tieri, though - I’m sure the plot concept came down the line from the editorial staff, and I wouldn’t turn down a paycheck either. Don’t buy this; in fact if any of your friends buy this, they don’t deserve your friendship.
The Darkness: Level Zero (Top Cow): About what you would expect of a Top Cow produced comic based on a video game. The story is somewhat incoherent, but it’s dark and depressing enough to appeal to fans of Top Cow and The Darkness. The painty art is even half way decent. Hey, it doesn’t have any advertisements, and it was better than War Crimes. If you’re a fan of Top Cow stuff or The Darkness, pick it up; otherwise skip it.
Nick Budd Read and Thought:
Iron Man/Captain America: Casualties of War (Marvel): Well, not to sound too corny, but there is something truly rotten in the state of Denmark. Oh, I’m sorry, that should read something’s rotten in the Marvel Universe. The culprits? Books like Iron Man/Captain America: Casualties of War, a Civil War one-shot written by a writer that I usually enjoy, Christos Gage. I can stomach a lot while reading a book, but having a story that unceremoniously degrades two of Marvel’s biggest icons into what can only be described as two pre-teen girls having a snit, and my limit has gone far past the point of no return. That doesn’t even take into account the bizarre things that are mentioned either. Things like, “Maybe if Peter Parker had been properly trained, he could have broken Gwen Stacey’s fall without breaking her neck.” Or a joke about how Hercules can’t even spell the word registration because he’s not that smart. This book is frustrating, depressing and…Heck, let’s go old school for a moment and just say, “Hulk Smash Puny Casualties of War!”
Walk In #1 (Virgin): Dave Stewart of the Eurythmics + Strip clubs and Octopi + Jeff Parker = One hell of a good time. Not sold yet by that eclectic combination? Then how about a sarcastic lead character who’s either quite mad or can really see into your dreams? Or how about the intricate and high quality art provided by Ashish Padlekar? There isn’t much not to like other than maybe the first person narrative and the breaking of the fourth wall. It’s a device that takes some time to get used to, but it fits the quirky vibe that the book is going for. Other than that very minor thing, Walk In is a trippy, very outlandish tale that comes straight out of left field and offers up something unexpected and fresh.
Randy Lander Read and Thought:
The Bakers Meet Jingle Belle (Dark Horse): OK, I didn’t really laugh like I usually do at The Bakers. See, the whole concept that makes The Bakers work is that it’s based on real life kid and parent stuff, and throwing Santa and his daughter in the mix takes the whole thing too far into fantasy territory. Add into that a script that is unfortunately just not that clever and funny, and it’s a pretty weak issue. Baker’s cartooning, solid as it is, suffers from the multi-panel standard comic book approach used here as well, and so the whole thing is a bit of a disappointing outing from animation and comic veterans Paul Dini and Kyle Baker. And yet… I can’t deny that the last couple pages are really sweet and touching moments of Christmas season cheer. Buy it if you’re a completist for any of the creators or characters involved, or if you feel the need to ward off your inner Grinch.
Criminal Macabre: Two Red Eyes #1 (Dark Horse:) Been awhile since I checked in on Steve Niles’ hard-boiled, drug-abusing supernatural P.I. Looks like he’s in a “series of miniseries” type situation (the indicia actually reads “Criminal Macabre #17″), as this is one of those first issues that doesn’t entirely make sense if you haven’t read the previous series that set it up. Some kinda fun noir narration, especially on the opening page, some wonderfully grotesque work by Kyle Hotz (who at this point has actually bypassed Kelley Jones, one of his clear influences, in my eyes), but if you’re not already a fan, odds are this somewhat muddled issue isn’t going to make you one.
Warhammer 40K #1 of 6 (Boom! Studios): Warhammer 40K reads a lot like the kind of thing you’d see in Humanoid Publishing comics, or maybe 2000 AD. Which is to say, it’s got painted art, a lot of imaginative gory visuals and concepts and characters who seem like they escaped from Jack Kirby’s mind when he was tripping heavy on steroids and meth. What with 40,000 years in the future, unending and therefore somewhat pointless warfare and constant carnage blending with goofy names like Carnodon and Raclaw, it’s all very over-the-top. And for me, it’s a bit much, but for others? Well, if you’ve got a hankering for something like barbarian fiction crossed with a fascist future that makes Starship Troopers look like a peaceful utopia, well, Warhammer 40K just might be for you.
Loading ...
Hey, excited to see that “Walk-in” was fun. The blurb about it on wikipedia makes it sound a little like the concepts in Hester’s “Deep Sleeper”. Even if that comparison is totally wrong, I’m still on board.
So.. Fables #56, Santa on the cover.. stand-alone issue? Spoil anything from #52-55?
20 Dec 2006 at 9:24 am
QuoteFables #56 has pretty notable spoilers for the events in Fables #48-50, which is in the new Wolves trade. There’s maybe one *minor* spoiler for the current series, but if you’re up on the latest trade, I think you’ll be all good.
20 Dec 2006 at 11:27 am
QuoteThanks for the info Randy. I am planning on getting the Wolves trade today. Is #56 a stand alone about Santa or no? If it’s not, then I can wait.. I just saw that it was oversized and thot maybe it was special.
20 Dec 2006 at 12:49 pm
QuoteI know this Civil war stuff looks good to Marvel now but in 5 years or less it’s the new spider CLONE saga
20 Dec 2006 at 2:43 pm
QuoteI dunno, I loved Iron Man/Captain America: Casualties of War. Weird dialogue aside, Gage did a very good job of laying out the pros and cons of the positions Cap and IM have taken. Both of them have screwed up royally. Too bad, however, that it took a stopgap special to explain what the problem is.
Ironic, however, for book supposedly so steeped in continuity no one could be bothered to remember hitting Jan is NOT what Yellowjacket went to jail for.
I bought Civil War: War Crimes. Now I don’t have any friends!
20 Dec 2006 at 2:51 pm
Quotethe things that bug me about CIVIL WAR…
1. Marvel itself playing “REAL World yet the anti-reg side is totally right you would WANT laws about superpowers if they were real.
2. Reed Richards the guy who stole a rocket, the guy that regularly invades Latvaria, THAT GUY says “the law is the law”?
3. I don’t even want to think about how contintity you have slice up for illumanati to work.What were they doing when Namor was teaming up with DOOM ETC
20 Dec 2006 at 3:31 pm
QuoteGiven Bendis’ recent interview in Write Now!, it’s almost like he’s doing The Illuminati to pick a fight with fans. “Oh, so you don’t like the way I pay attention to continuity? Well, take THIS!” Instead of, you know, just telling a story about the things that interest him and using the characters as a vehicle for it. Like he does in Powers. I mean, jesus, if we chap your ass that much, go write novels and screenplays. In the long run, you’ll hurt yourself as much as you’re hurting us. And if you don’t believe that, I got one word for you: newuniversal.
20 Dec 2006 at 4:09 pm
QuoteHmm…I knew War Crimes would be crap - it is written by Frank Tieri, after all, and thus I didn’t pre-order it. The Iron Man/Cap special has a decent creative team, and I did pre-order it, so I’m disappointed to hear it’s not too great. I guess I’ll know when my comics arrive.
That’s a shame about the Illuminati, though - the one-shot from earlier this year was great, and I think the concept has a lot of potential. My knowledge of most of these events being retconned is hazy at best, so whatever continuity errors may arise probably won’t bother me too much, at least.
20 Dec 2006 at 4:12 pm
QuoteI get the feeling that the internet brings fans and pros too close I’ve gotten REALLY Tired of the JQ/Bendis/ Millar interview that goes “BLANK never worked for ME if you don’t like it read back issuses” That wears on me to the point where in some ways I don’t even consider myself a fan anymore.
20 Dec 2006 at 10:35 pm
QuoteI liked the idea of the bigwigs getting together to boot Hulk’s ass off the planet in a form of a passive-aggressive method of ridding of his potential problems. That was cool, but only as a more desperate meeting of the minds. To have them an ongoing uber-group that gets together to do this is less interesting. If they did it as a “What If…” that might be fun. What if the Illuminati were the reason or solution behind every problem in Marvel history? But not as the real deal.
When is Civil War over? Ever? It feels like it has been going on for three years now, even though I know it hasn’t been. Is this going to be the mode every year, now? Some major crossover event to connect all comics in a horrible, contrived way? It was okay when it happened every once and a while but hell… X-Factor, created kind of out of the whole House of M shindig (which was a neat concept, if not brilliantly executed, at least) has had to deal with TWO major Crisis in its short run…it started with the fall out of M (whole Son of M, protecting Mutant town, etc.) to this Civil War and it isn’t 14 issues old!! Cripes! What is next?
Are we going to have a year of crossover action to deal with Hulk’s return? Fallout from Annihilation (my favorite “big event” from this year)? House of Illuminati? Crisis in Infinite Manhattans?
21 Dec 2006 at 4:47 pm
Quoteactully I liked the shipping the Hulk off the EARTH. It was stupid but I laughed my ass off! You have Reed Richards, tony Stark, PROF X and DR STRANGE guiding a rocket annnnnnnnnd it gets LOST! Man Reed’s got sorry luck with rockets.
21 Dec 2006 at 10:58 pm
QuoteI’m kinda interested in Warhammer 40K, mostly bc I used play the slimmed down board game version “Star Quest” in the 90s. But I’ve got to agree that the book seems to be too dark and archaic from what I’ve so far in samples.
22 Dec 2006 at 4:38 am
QuoteThe Civil War: Illuminati review is overly harsh. I had no problem with the dialogue and certainly did not find the Skrulls overly “quippy”. The only time they did such was when they were in the position of power - I’ve always thought of them as smug and dominant. It’s certainly not like they were trading banter back and forth with the Illuminati, which is what I had assumed when I read this review.
Also, morality is hardly different in this issue. Comics have long done the “lets blow up the giant building/ship/car and not acknowledge all the people who have died there”. It’s not like the Illuminati pulled out guns and decided to be Punisher knock-offs. This was well within traditional comic violence guidelines and is certainly a red herring issue with the review.
I’m glad I picked up this issue, and I look forward to the next one. I think the idea behind it is pretty interesting, and look forward to seeing where they take it from here.
22 Dec 2006 at 10:07 am
QuoteWow, rough week. I can’t say I hated New Avengers: Illuminati or the Civil War tie-ins, because I didn’t read them, aside from a skim to confirm the awfulness and sounds of pain coming from the rest of the Panteon. But this week did give us new issues of Pirates of Coney Island, Criminal and Fables, as well as the end of the somewhat weak Y: The Last Man arc, hopefully clearing the decks for a finale more along the lines of the rest of the series.
Arch14, I think we may just be coming at this from completely different places. It’s basically a question of what you’re willing to accept. If Bendis’ dialogue doesn’t grate on you, then you’re not going to as immediately notice that the skrulls are talking like Bendis characters. If you’re generally OK with the gray morality increasingly displayed by Marvel’s big guns, the retconning of that gray morality back into the early days won’t bug you.
But the intent behind the comics is quite clearly different these days then it was when the Kree/Skrull War first happened. Did the Avengers and X-Men really blow up a lot of big ships and buildings in their old days, because I don’t honestly remember it happening. Even if it did, the intent of the writers at that point was pretty evidently that the heroes weren’t killing anyone. Millar, Bendis and the rest seem to take as written that it’s OK for the heroes to kill, as long as they’re being badass enough when they do it. And to me, that kind of thing is just ridiculously unsuited to the characters I grew up reading.
I’m also no fan of the whole notion that these characters would get together and decide to rocket Hulk off into space. You’re telling me that you’ve got the greatest scientific and magical minds on the planet focused on a problem, and they can’t come up with something a little more innovative, and certainly a little less cruel to both the Hulk and his host, Bruce Banner? Bah. I call foul.
22 Dec 2006 at 11:59 am
Quotethere WERE no x-men during the Kree/war there title had been caned and when they did show it was just scot jean and prof. Bendis himself mention how stupid it was for Black Bolt and Namor to be there but put them in anyway.
DR strange was pretending to be dead at the time of the Kree/SKRULL WAR. Basicly I see REED and tony Working togather but NOBODY Else
ps Marvel Team up 9 came out around that time so the X-MEN (Sans Beast) were around but not doing much
22 Dec 2006 at 12:26 pm
QuoteRandy: and let’s face it, the heroes sending Hulk to a far off place they think no one else could get to and he’d harm no one happened over 20 years ago in The Incredible Hulk #300… and he still got back to earth.
Greg Pak’s “Planet Hulk” is basically Crossroads with shittier art and less psychobabble.
22 Dec 2006 at 11:41 pm
QuotePutting fan-boy biases aside, the writing and story in Bendis’ New Avengers: Illuminati and the Casualties of War one-shot are pretty good. Bendis has taken an intriguing idea of validating and expanding his Illuminati concept by inserting them into Marvel continuity. So far though, there seems to be minimal overlap and conflict and some measure of respect for previous continuity. Though I agree that the morality exhibited in destroying the Skrull command ship is grey, the heroes themselves after doing (except for Namor) seemed to realize the despicable nature of their actions but deemed it necessary for the greater good. International politics is a dirty no-rules zero sum business, as seen most recently with the U.S. pre-emptive invasion of Iraq. The writing itself in the series was not overly quippy Bendis, and Cheung’s art was pretty good. The story, continuity biases and nostalgia biases aside, was pretty dramatic and exciting.
In regard to Casualties of War, I felt that this was meant to shore up each of the sides of the Civil War debate through a discussion between Iron Man and Captain America. I liked how it referenced past continuity to make its points, and how strong they are making Iron Man’s side, though he seems the inevitable loser of this war. Though its a talking heads issue, I thought this type of debate about the issues raised by Civil War was interesting and I’m glad that it was done. I can imagine that it would be hard to get into the action and plot oriented issues of the series itself, and it really laid out both sides of the issue as well as explore some of the personal motivations of both Cap and Iron Man in leading each side. It’s good writing in the end, and it’s not off-character on either side, and I definitely recommend it as a good comic read.
Finally, I think comic reviews in general (as for any review) should try to be more objective and judge the comic based on what it set out to achieve and whether the comic executed it well in terms of writing, art, and story. Both New Avengers Illuminati and Casualties of War were well done and pretty good pieces of comic book writing that should satisfy any fan looking for a great read.
23 Dec 2006 at 3:27 am
QuoteI see your point about crititical objectivity Albret and I really think it’s a noble goal in some ways but…
1. why is it good to put “fan-boyish biasies aside?” writter dont do that Civil war is based on huge chunks of Marvel history with parts the current bigwigs at Marvel don’t like ignored. I cant speak to the second Ilumaniti book but it struck me in the illumaniti one shot (last year?) that they counted on you to a 34 year old story and then changed details that bugged me.
2. In the interest of revealing my baises while not ever saying that i’m wrong. I don’t LIKE bendis Millar or Civil war but as long as people know that it ok
23 Dec 2006 at 2:21 pm
QuoteAlbert,
I can’t really argue the merits of Civil War: Cap/Iron Man or New Avengers: Illuminati, as that would require me reading them, and I’m not prepared to make that sacrifice.
Honestly, at this point my inclination is to just give the point to folks who share your viewpoint. It’s pretty clear that folks like me are going to be dismissed in general as nothing more than fanboy whiners, no matter what points we make, and the majority seems to want the darker, more realistic version of superheroes being served up. I’ll just slide over to the side here and read Vertigo, indie and the occasional superhero project that fits my sensibilities and probably doesn’t sell as a result.
However, your last paragraph contains a fallacy that I can’t let stand.
Finally, I think comic reviews in general (as for any review) should try to be more objective and judge the comic based on what it set out to achieve and whether the comic executed it well in terms of writing, art, and story. Both New Avengers Illuminati and Casualties of War were well done and pretty good pieces of comic book writing that should satisfy any fan looking for a great read.
Actually, the problem is, your last sentence is not objective either. It’s completely subjective. Were they well done, or is it just that you liked them?
More to the point, though, good criticism is *not* objective. It requires an opinion on the behalf of the reviewer. The reviewer should put any personal biases aside (for example, if I thought Bendis was a jerk, that shouldn’t enter into my reviews), but when you read a review, you are getting one informed opinion about a movie/comic/etc., nothing more and nothing less.
23 Dec 2006 at 3:34 pm
QuoteRe: Bendis’ dialogue-
I went back to look through the dialogue of this issue, particularly for “quipping” with which the reviewer took issue. I only found one section of the comic where the skrulls could be seen to have overly light dialogue…perhaps dialogue that is uncharacteristic of their culture? I’m not sure what the problem was exactly, the review was pretty brief. However, this idea that Bendis’ dialogue is the same in every issue, that’s it’s all banter, is unbased. Sure, I’ve cringed at moments in his comics, but nothing out of the ordinary for most super-hero comics that I read.
Re: Morality -
I will concede this one a little bit. You are right, the intent of the action is different in this comic is different that comics in the 60s and 70s. The Illuminati intended to destroy the Skrull Ship, and they did.
However, I still think the violence is treated similar to previous comic eras. How many buildings have been destroyed in super hero battles? How many people have been hit by lasers that all seem to be set to stun? Really, a lot of this non-violence is just violence that is glossed over. Sure, some characters have a moral point not to kill, Spiderman being a big example.
But you’re right, I don’t mind the “realistic” take on violence. I don’t mind Captain America and Bucky being shown to kill people in WWII because that’s what happened. I don’t mind the Illuminati destroying the Skrull ship because the Skrull and Kree had just used Earth as their battleground and had no concern for humanity. Personally, I have no interest in reading Punisher or Wolverine where they revel in death and make it the point of their vigilanteism, but writers admitting that casualties happen in these battles? Yeah, that doesn’t bother me.
24 Dec 2006 at 11:43 am
QuoteRandy, you’re entitled to your opinion and choice of staying away from certain comics. But I think that reviews can and should be objective to a point. A reviewer can signal their personal distaste for a storyline, and separate it from their analysis of how effectively the comic executed its story in terms of the art, writing, and plot pacing. This is not anything against your own reviews Randy, because I’ve found that for the most part they have been fair-minded and properly signaled where your objective appreciation for their execution and mainstream appeal ends, and when your personal preferences and opinion begins.
24 Dec 2006 at 9:20 pm
QuoteSorry for the double entry, but I also agree with arch 14 about allowing for the recognition of real casualties as a result of violence and war. I can see the point though that it may trample on the moral idealism and inspiration that these comics are meant to serve for young readers. It seems many of the original fans of these comics in their heyday, who have grown up since, are the main targets of the industry. It’s trying to portray and even ret-con a more realistic, mature take on comics continuity. I don’t mind it in terms of where I am in my own moral maturity and understanding of the “real world,” but I can see how it might hurt the impressionable youth who have yet to build up inspirational models and moral philosophies and look up to certain heroic ideals in their comics.
24 Dec 2006 at 9:27 pm
QuoteDude whats your problem.
Ok i’ll admit civil war did go off it’s rocker abit, i mean come on… as if captain american and iron man would fight like that after they’ve been on the same side for so long and I also notice the sentry was on ironman’s side but he was rarely mentioned.
But overall i found it interesting at best.. like Sue and Reed splitting up and it shows you where the heroes loyalties lie.
IFrom my point of veiw Civil War was omething new and a breath of fresh air, it has its flas but it’s still a good read and worth having in any good marvel fan’s collection.
17 Jun 2007 at 6:22 pm
Quote