sniffle.

TIM SEELEY

Actually comicscontinuum.com puts up quite a few solicits for indie publishers, certainly in comparison to all the sites mentioned. Personally I can’t stand the pop ups, but I still check about once a week for almost that reason alone. Nothing is perfect, even Previews, which is why I try to use many resources, one of the best being Down The Line, and I am not buttering up with that remark, Randy knows his shit. He remembers the good creators, he almost always has plenty of reasons for his choices. I find that to be very informative. And when going off a blurb and a cover, you need as much info as you can get.

As for online previews, Alan, I like to use mailordercomics.com or mycomicshop.com’s Subscription Service page. You can almost always find full solicits and cover images on their pre-order pages. 3 downsides to that, though 1. You have to browse through the online pages, which is not as practical as the actual catalog (mycomicshop.com is easier to browse through). 2. If there’s any preview interior art in Previews, it won’t be on these sites. 3. You have to wait until the beginning of the month (in this case, February) to see them, as opposed to…next week, when the catalog is released.

However, I like to think I might catch a few things in my Down the Line that indie readers might like, for those who aren’t getting Previews and can trust my tastes.

I don’t read the Marvel solicits because they frequently are misleading or give away story points.

There must be a site or two that puts Previews online. One can always read them there, I’d think.

But back to the Chimp. I am not sure why someone wouldn’t by a Holmsian monkey that goes by the name Detective Chimp! Should he have gone for a hard-boiled detective look and feel? Or maybe Colombo (”Just one more thing…”)? Dude, its a Chimp. That’s smarter than Batman (according to the Chimp…). Worked for me. I liked the idea that the Fate helmet was searching for a host. I do agree that Chimp as Fate would be bad but still, it was nice he was considered.

My issue wasn’t with him being a good detective at all, it was that the vibe I’ve gotten from him in Shadowpact so far was more of a usual, clue-hunting detective, so it seemed weird. Just my take, though. The Fate helmet hunting for a host is a classic story, and it makes sense that it would check out the Chimp, since he was tasked with taking care of it. That part was all good.

I do buy the idea that he didn’t want the helmet because he didn’t have the mental discipline to weed out what was important and what wasn’t. Superman has to do this every day we are told sometimes because he can hear everything going on and if he gave into that, he would go nuts. Chimp said this wouldn’t work for him and was done with it.

Here, it wasn’t that he recognized that he couldn’t do it that was a problem for me- of course having the power of Dr. Fate would be hard as hell to handle, and the Chimp was wise to see that. It was his reasoning that a detective’s analytical mind was why he couldn’t do it that rang a little false. If he’d just left it at ‘I can’t handle this, my mind don’t work that way” and not implied that all analytical people or detectives were bad choices for the Helm (which is powered by a Lord of Order) it would have fit together better for me. It wasn’t bad as it is, just didn’t quite assemble properly.

But back to the Chimp. I am not sure why someone wouldn’t by a Holmsian monkey that goes by the name Detective Chimp! Should he have gone for a hard-boiled detective look and feel? Or maybe Colombo (”Just one more thing…”)? Dude, its a Chimp. That’s smarter than Batman (according to the Chimp…). Worked for me. I liked the idea that the Fate helmet was searching for a host. I do agree that Chimp as Fate would be bad but still, it was nice he was considered.

I do buy the idea that he didn’t want the helmet because he didn’t have the mental discipline to weed out what was important and what wasn’t. Superman has to do this every day we are told sometimes because he can hear everything going on and if he gave into that, he would go nuts. Chimp said this wouldn’t work for him and was done with it.

Anyway, it was a good, fun issue. Not groundbreaking and definitely not in the FABLES camp but still an interesting read. Not sure if I will pick up the rest, though.

Nah, never happen. I’ll always explain my opinions to the creator, as I feel I owe that much… but I won’t change them to be nice. If I’m proven wrong or convinced otherwise, maybe. And I know my fellow reviewers feel the same. I like the interaction with pros and fans alike, the increased feedback and discussion is one of my favorite things about changing over from Fourth Rail to Comic Pants.

Especially as I think the level of discourse is generally pretty high, particularly when you consider our semi-goofy name and nature.

Well, I like your art, Tim. I think the Comic Pantsies were in a cranky mood because of the cold weather.

Dex

here

I feel David’s review deserves a response:

http://joshhoward.typepad.com/joshhowardnet/2007/01/slutification.html

Wow, I never expected a response quite like this one. I don’t believe the intent of my review got across to Mr. Howard properly, and I sincerely regret it if my intent was not clear in my review. I still stand by what I said in my review, but a bit of clarification might be in order. The last thing I want to do is make enemies or inadvertently lead somebody to believe I was insulting their work.

Highly sexualized? Really? Not just sexualized, but highly sexualized. That’s quite a charge. Does David remember Genesis? Adam and Eve walked around naked before the Fall. That’s God’s doing, not mine. Never mind the fact that all naughty bits were covered in my book. Not one nipple or vagina anywhere, much less anyone actually having sex. Next.

I in no way meant to infer that the book was pornographic. I wasn’t even referring to the implied nudity at all when I called it highly sexualised. In fact, if I had read a text script of the book, the word sexual would never have crossed my mind, but the art, in my opinion, carried strong sexual overtones. I didn’t even mean to infer that the sexual energy was a bad thing. I only meant to state that it was present. Based on Mr. Howard’s response to my review, I don’t believe that the sexual vibe I perceived was his intent. Regardless of his intent, it is still what I perceived, so that is what I described in my review. It was not a bash of the book but merely a report of what I saw when I read it.

I suppose we’re in subjective territory here, and the only thing that comes close to a valid opinion in his review. But I have to wonder, no surprises? So he fully expected God to be covered in eyes? Interesting.

I don’t suppose that I opened the book with the expectation of seeing God covered in eyes. I was merely not surprised to find God represented in a strange and beyond-human-comprehension sort way.

This is where I get really pissed. Slutification of the Bible? First of all, I’m one of the only creators out there who actually gives respect to the Bible. Second, I would challenge the most conservative, fundamentalist Southern Baptist preacher to find one example of where I “slutified” the Bible in my book. Even if I had shown Eve in all her naked glory, that still doesn’t enter into slut territory. David either needs to check his dictionary or start telling the truth.

Again, I regret that I chose the exact words that I did, but the concept behind my words is one that I still adhere to. It wasn’t the nudity that caused me to see the book in a sexual light. It was a strong, intangible vibe that I perceived in the art. Again, that may not have been Mr. Howard’s intent, but it is what I saw, and it is what I described. The word “slutification” may very well have been too strong a choice; maybe I should have just said that the sexual appeal of Mr. Howard’s Eve makes it hard for me not to see the character in a sexual light. Maybe I didn’t see what the artist intended his audience to see, but that is one of the risks when art is displayed in a public forum.

You don’t have to like my backgrounds. I’ll be the first to admit I suck at ‘em. But “mostly solid colors or merely two-color gradients?” At this point, I’m wondering if David has even read my book. There’s more backgrounds in this book than any book I’ve done to date.

To be honest, I didn’t actually count panels until today. “Mostly” is technically accurate, but it may give the impression that the vast majority of the panels are solid colors or gradients. It is actually very close to half and half. The backgrounds weren’t my thing, but it was not my intent to paint the picture that they were virtually nonexistent in the book.

In other words, if you like shit, this book’s for you.

That is not at all what I intended by “A weaker than average offering from Howard, but if you’re a fan, you might dig it anyways.” In fact, I don’t think the book is shit. The intent of that sentence was to say that I found, what were in my eye, flaws in the book, and that many fans of Mr. Howard’s artwork enjoy the artwork to such an extent that the flaws may not bother them as much as they bothered me. It was actually a suggestion that fans of Mr. Howard’s work try out the book despite my misgivings.

http://joshhoward.typepad.com/joshhowardnet/2007/01/slutification.html

Amen. I read 1st issue of Wildstorm’s Elm Street and the 1st two issues of their Friday the 13th. Neither one of them held my attention (despite being much better than their Avatar published predecessors), but the Chainsaw one is very, very good. It’s got some fun twists with a great cast of characters.

I also have to give kudos to the Conan 1st issue. The Conan minis are always good, imo. The way this one starts off is no different.