The Mix : What are people talking about today?

John Ostrander: Bond… My Favorite Bond

james-bond-2285647

I am reluctant to name anything “the best” because that appellation is usually very subjective. It’s easier to name something as “my favorite” because… how can you argue that? You may say that I have no taste but my favorite something is my favorite.

James Bond has existed in the movies for over fifty years and as a character in books even longer. A large number of actors have played the part onscreen and all of them (yes, even Roger Moore) have had good films. Some turkeys in there, too.

For many people, James Bond is Sean Connery. I can fully understand that – he was the first to depict 007 onscreen and many of the traits he introduced became defining tropes. I would argue, however, that some of the excesses that crept into the franchise also started during the Connery years. The over the top villains, the elaborate sets by Ken Adams, the women as sex objects and so on. They became set in stone and the Bond films became fossilized and outdated even as they were made.

When Daniel Craig became the new Bond in 2006, the entire series was revamped. The whole approach to Bond changed. The franchise was very much influenced by the Jason Bourne movies. Bond was more realistic and so were his opponents. Skyfall stripped Bond down; at one point, he is out of shape, seedy looking, and not in command of himself or the situations he finds himself in. He’s aging and the film admits that; Bond has to work to become the Bond he was once again, if he can.

So – what is my favorite Bond, both actor and movie? Again, no disrespect meant to the other Bonds but my favorite actors playing the character are Daniel Craig and Sean Connery. Correspondingly, my favorite Bond movies are Skyfall, From Russia With Love, and Goldfinger. If I had to choose between Connery and Craig which actor is my favorite? Which of the three Bond movies is my Number One?

It’s so hard to compare. While certain tropes remain the same, there are so many differences that it’s as if there are two different characters named James Bond. Sean Connery’s Bond is very much a man of his time – late 50s to mid 60s – while Daniel Craig’s Bond is very much of today. In From Russia With Love, Bond is perhaps closest to the Ian Fleming novels’ version of the character. That’s not always a good thing; the books, in addition to being highly chauvinistic, could be terribly racist. It can make you cringe.

Goldfinger, without a doubt, is the most entertaining of the three films but, for me, Skyfall is better written and has the best director in Sam Mendes (an Academy Award winner for American Beauty). It’s full of grace notes and visual flourishes, such as the scenes in Shanghai. Some shots are just stunningly beautiful.

To be honest, while I love Goldfinger, for me the choice for the best Bond film comes down to From Russia With Love and Skyfall. The Bonds depicted, though, are so different! In the end, I give the edge to Skyfall as the best Bond film. It suits my sensibilities. And, yes, for me the best 007 is Daniel Craig. Heresy to some, I know, but there it is. That’s also a very tight race.

The favoritism of Craig’s Bond may increase with the release of the newest Bond film, Spectre, in November. The current series has dug deeper into who the character is and this promises to further that exploration. After fifty years, they’re still finding something new to do with James Bond.

I can’t wait.

 

Marc Alan Fishman: Bill Cosby, Subway Jared, and Arthur Suydam

Fat AlbertAre there good guys anymore? Perhaps just you, my loyal readers. This past week we’ve seen enough to be stark (no, not Tony) raving mad.

First, the Associated Press finally caught Bill Cosby with his pants down – so to speak. Any more of his bluster is now faced with the truth that under oath he admitted to having drugged women prior to engaging in sexual activities.

Speaking of sex crimes… Subway’s own Jared Fogel was detained this week under suspicion of owning child pornography. To be fair, he may yet be absolved – a former employee of his was previously caught with the same material – but the PR damage is done.

And in our little neck of the blogosphere, artist Arthur Suydam was caught pilfering adjacent tables at a recent comic-con akin perhaps to Hitler’s taking of Poland. Maybe I’m being a bit harsh? I was all soft and gooey last week. Screw it. Let’s get snarky!

The story, as Artie would have you believe, was that he arrived at the convention and was shown to his table. He set up as normal, and life was wonderful. Apparently you see, the promoters mistakenly displaced several artists in order to meet the request of Arthur taking on four tables in the Artist Alley. Now let’s be clear: no one was denied a table space. However, the promoters did have show materials (guides, programs, etc.) with those aforementioned detainees placed next to Suydam. Clearly as folks made their way around the show, trying to find those people who clearly weren’t Arthur resulted in a stalwart fans having to do a bit of unnecessary sleuthing to trip over their intended artists. Was Arthur in the wrong?

I’ve only a little doubt that he took up four tables rightfully. As I recall at several shows I’ve been at with him, he does typically squat over a larger footprint than others. This is necessary so he can display his mammoth one-note zombified prints. I’ll not deny he has artistic talent. And as a businessman, if he’s somehow able to make profit by paying for what constitutes a vendor-sized space selling his posters? Who am I to nay-say his entrepreneurial spirit!

Wait! I remember… I’m an indie creator who has to play by the rules with conventions. Conventions that likely never let individual artists usurp multiple tables within the Artist Alley. Why? Because the exhibition space is sold for those needing more than an eight-foot table to their name. And while Arthur himself may be more noteworthy due to his run as a Marvel Zombies cover artist then, say, a completely unknown artist, that shouldn’t necessarily grant him carte blanch to take a table away from someone who deserves an opportunity to be at the show too.

Now, I’m not a convention promoter, nor am I an event coordinator. But certainly if someone asked me to purchase multiple alley tables, my instinct is to immediately offer a space on the show floor proper, if real estate is so sought-after. The only time I’d be apt to let a man become his own island is if my Alley has more space than interest. At the comics convention Suydam attended, I sincerely doubt there weren’t a few people on a waiting list who would have chomped at the bit to be at the show. Instead, the comic convention world at large had an opportunity to call out Arthur on his bad practices.

It would seem, akin to the aforementioned Cosby, that Arthur Sudyam is a long-time criminal offender without an actual rapsheet. Many folks who can continue to enjoy their anonymity came forward during Tablegate (or the better coined #Sudyamized) to denote their stories of Arthur usurping space much like the shuffling zombies of his milieu. And given that Sudyam had to have his people respond to the allegations that swam across Bleeding Cool, Comic Book Resources, and Newsarama, it only makes him feel that much more guilty.

Beyond the small guys proclaiming their hatred, the well-named (and wonderful) Erik Larsen and Mark Waid stood tall to declare their spite as well, showcasing Sudyam’s posting of twitpics with obviously Photoshopped crowds to prove his, ah, drawing power.

Artie’s response: In a few words, he chalked it up to his people posting on his behalf as a representation not only of his line but the con experience in general. No harm, no foul he said. Sorry. I cry foul.

Simply put, Arthur Sudyam’s enterprise preys on show promoters, and blots out the sun of neighboring booths. While it’s not like he himself forces gawkers from lingering away from smaller tables to his mountain of material… it stands to be noted that it’s purveyors like him that make Unshaven Comics feel infinitesimal when all we have to our names is a 30” wide pop-up banner. But the mob has spoken, and Arthur Suydam’s name is unmistakably synonymous with ill-will. I’d consider that a win for the good guys.

 

The Law Is A Ass

Bob Ingersoll: The Law Is A Ass #364: THE BLACK HOOD-WINKS MIRANDA

STK670116I really want to see that handbook. Or technical manual. Or whatever it is that sets the procedures and policies fictional police operate under. Because the police in comic books, movies, and television are constantly talking about procedures – things they claim they get to do – that are simply wrong. Like the totally outlandish statement in the recent The Black Hood #4.

We interrupt our dissertation on the law for a dissertation on history. The Black Hood dates back to the 40s and was published by MLJ Comics; the company which later became Archie Comics. The character has kicked around since then, being revived several times to varying degrees of success. It varies from very little to none at all. The current Black Hood comic is published by Dark Circle Comics, a sub-imprint that Archie Comics created so its super heroes weren’t constrained by the kid-friendly books Archie publishes.

Not constrained is something of an understatement. The Black Hood drops more F bombs than Lewis Black in a Scorsese movie. The Black Hood was the first comic book published by Archie that used that particular word. (First comic, but not the first Archie character. I’m looking at you, Miss Grundy!)

In the grim and gritty world of The Black Hood, there are cops and there are bad guys and cops who self-identify as bad guys. But what’s important to us, is that the cops shown in The Black Hood # 4 were sitting around a table while the comic’s first-person narrative captions read, “Technically, cops can hold a suspect for six hours before having to read them Miranda. Nobody likes it much, but that’s the law.”

No, that’s not the law.

The caption used the word, “Technically.” That implies the technical manual or handbook I mentioned earlier; a book that must have more errors than the ’62 Mets . Any book that can muck up something so simple as when Miranda warnings should be read must be like one of those puzzle pictures in the Highlights for Children Magazine. You know: How many things can you find wrong in this picture?

The Miranda warnings – which are not an advisory that Turner Classic Movies is about to air a frothy musical starring a Brazilian fruit fancier – are actually an advisory created by the Supreme Court of the United States in Miranda v. Arizona. The Miranda court noted the long history of coercive interrogation tactics that the police employed over the years. Tactics called the third degree. No one seems to know where that name came from, but I think we can assume it wasn’t because the interrogators had a B.A., an M.B.A, and a Ph.D. No, we’re talking enhanced interrogation including physical torture, mental torture, and even multiple screenings of the Tommy Wiseau movie The Room. Remember this is interrogation we’re talking about not punishment, “cruel and unusual” doesn’t apply.

In order to stop the police’s pervasive use of enhanced interrogation techniques, the Miranda court imposed a requirement on the police. Before the police conduct a custodial interrogation, they must advise the detainees that they have the right to remain silent, that anything they say can be used against them, that they have the right to an attorney, and that if they can’t afford an attorney one would be appointed for them. If the police don’t give prisoners their Miranda rights before they begin custodial interrogation, then anything the prisoners say cannot be introduced against them in a court of law.

So is it true that “technically” the police don’t have to read prisoners their Miranda rights for the first six hours of custody? Is the Pope Jewish?

Miranda doesn’t set actually any time limit. The police don’t have someone playing The Minute Waltz 359 times, so they know when to give the warnings. Miranda warnings aren’t triggered by time but by interrogation.

Miranda warnings must be given before any custodial interrogation begins. If the police want to interrogate someone in custody right away, then they must give the Miranda warnings right away. They can’t start questioning the detainee then give the Miranda warnings six hours later. The only way the police can wait six hours before giving a suspect in custody the Miranda warnings is if the police wait six hours before questioning the suspect. There’s no six-hour Don’t-Get-Out-Of-Jail-Free card associated with Miranda. Not “technically” and not actually.

That’s one example of something this technical police procedure handbook got completely wrong. It’s not the only one. There are others. Lots of others. Over the next few weeks, I’m going to examine some more of these procedures that fictional police officers talk about all the time. Things they say they get to do which they actually don’t get to do.

So stick around. It should be at least as much fun as reading about what nonsense Batman was up to this week.

Martha Thomases: Where Have You Gone Mr. Robinson?

airboy7

It’s not a secret that I’m a huge fan of James Robinson. I’ve loved his work since I saw preview pages of The Golden Age more than twenty years ago. Those first few pages gave me goosebumps. When I met James, I thought he was cute and funny and completely charming. I’m a sucker for an accent.

So you can imagine how upset I am that I seem to be on the wrong side of the most recent kerfuffle in comics, the depiction of transgendered characters in the second issue of Airboy. I read that issue, and I didn’t notice.

That’s on me.

I’m writing this because I think the reaction is overblown, and I think I might be wrong about that. I want to untangle my thoughts, and ask for advice on how to see this differently. Is this a failing of empathy on my part? Do I have a blind spot brought on by thoughtlessness or privilege or something else or all of the above?

(Note: I don’t want anyone to turn this around into some kind of “It’s their fault because they’re too sensitive” screed. I’m not blaming the victim. People read something and they have emotions about it. That’s what fiction is for.)

I read the first issue and thought it was hilarious. The depiction of James and artist/co-conspirator Greg Hinkle was so over the top and filled with self-loathing that I related immediately. With the drugs and the drinking and the indiscriminate sex, the story seemed to show a couple of middle-aged guys behaving in a way that I (and most of my friends) got out of our systems in our twenties.

And then (SPOILER ALERT!) Airboy showed up.

In the second issue, the one that upset some people, James and Greg try to figure out if Airboy is really there or if they’re hallucinating. Airboy is just as confused. They go to a bar. A gay bar that attracts drag queens (their usage) and transgendered women. James doesn’t let Greg explain that part to Airboy.

Hence, Airboy is upset when he discovers that the person who blew him in the bathroom has a penis.

In between, there is a two-page scene in which Robinson complains that he can’t get what he wants from writing comics for DC and Marvel. He says he’s pigeon-holed as the “Golden Age” guy. Rather than wondering where Airboy was at this time, I was too busy feeling guilty that perhaps I was part of the audience that contributed to James’ professional problems.

And when the story revealed where Airboy had been, I was more surprised that a comic book hero, already depicted as rigidly proper and straight, had participated in a sex act in a public restroom. At that point, his partner and her genitals seemed like the least startling element.

When I read about the controversy later, I felt terrible. Some people said they felt threatened. Others complained that the transgendered characters weren’t even characters. A few called for a boycott. A few demanded the scene be expunged from the trade paperback.

I went and re-read the story. I still didn’t get it. The transgendered characters aren’t developed, but neither is any other person in the story but our three leads. The bartender is there to serve drinks. The drug dealers are there to deal drugs. James’ then-wife, Jann, is there to show what James is pissing away. The point of view of the story is deliberately myopic.

To his credit, Robinson apologized. It’s a nice apology, heartfelt and contrite and gracious. He explains what he was trying to do, but he doesn’t try to weasel out of the hurt that he caused.

So, help me out here, members and allies of the LGBTQ community. What am I not seeing? I get that it’s thoughtless, but hurtful?

It seems to me that the solution is not to (only) bitch about this particular story (which every reader should do when so moved), but to enable more people to tell more different stories. A comic book medium with more transgendered writers and artists telling the stories they want to tell would lessen the impact of this particular comic book.

In the meantime, I’m grateful that my crush on James never came to anything. Clearly, I would have disappointed him.

 

Doctor Who Series 9 To Premiere September 19

In a continuing torrent of news and excitement from a regional comic convention on the west coast, BBC America announced the premiere date of series nine of Doctor Who – September 19th.

Having filmed in Cardiff since January, Peter Capaldi said:

“Soaring through all of time and space, series nine sees the Doctor throw himself into life with a new hunger for adventure. The Cosmos is there for the taking, thrilling, epic and enticing, and his to play in. But he’s almost reckless in his abandon. It’s almost like he’s running from something, something that if it ever catches him will turn his life upside down.”

Michelle Gomez will return as Missy, the latest incarnation of The Master, in the season’s two-part premiere The Magician’s Assistant / The Witch’s Familiar. Highlights of the series so far revealed include the return of Kate Stewart, U.N.I.T., Osgood, and the Zygons, an episode featuring Vikings in space, a city of Daleks, and a new race of mercenaries known as The Mire.

Mark Gatiss returns to writing for the series, as well as new contributors including Sarah Dollard and Catherine Tregenna.

New Die Hard Collection Comes in Nakatomi Plaza Package

unnamed (1)LOS ANGELES, Calif. (July 8, 2015) – Ever wanted to scale Nakatomi Plaza with John McClane, just like in the first Die Hard? On October 13, fans can do just that with the NAKATOMI PLAZA: DIE HARD COLLECTION! Featuring all five of the franchise’s action-packed films in a replica of the legendary Los Angeles tower, this limited edition collection is McClane-approved and like nothing you’ve ever seen before, making it the perfect gift for action and Die Hard fans everywhere.

Every limited-edition set comes with all five films on both Blu-ray™ and Digital HD as well as an explosive hour-long featurette that celebrates this iconic franchise with filmmakers and talent interviews. The Nakatomi Plaza also honors Hans Gruber and the vanquished villains from the series with collectible cards only found in the box set. And if that wasn’t enough, check out the 32-Page, behind-the-scenes book on all the secrets of the movies that even the most die-hard fans may not even know!

NAKATOMI PLAZA: DIE HARD COLLECTION FEATURES:

Blu-ray & Digital HD Versions

Die Hard
Die Hard 2: Die Harder
Die Hard: With A Vengeance
Live Free or Die Hard (includes Unrated Version)
A Good Day to Die Hard (includes Unrated Version)
Blu-ray Bonus Disc: “Decoding Die Hard”
5 Exclusive Villain Collectible Cards
32-Page Behind-The-Scenes Booklet on the Franchise

Tweeks: SDCC 2015

Greetings from San Diego Comic Con 2015!  Last night we attended Preview Night and Maddy thinks this is going to be the best Con ever (and as you’ll see, we have quite a history at SDCC).  We will be documenting the next four days full of interviews and panels and shopping on Twitter, Facebook & Periscope, so make sure to follow us. But until then, here’s our vlog where we eat animal cookies & talk about our most anticipate panels and what you can do here in town if you weren’t lucky enough to get a badge.  There’s actually a lot of great fun free stuff happening in the Gaslamp, like a Tumblr Welcome To Night Vale meetup, a Snoopy & Belle boutique, an X-Men fan screening and free breakfasts courtesy of Impractical Jokers.

Lego Unveils Doctor Who Playset

After numerous teases and sneak peeks, Lego released the official video for the Doctor Who playset for their contribution to the “Toys to Life” video game category, Lego Dimensions.

docbrown2-300x257-4939803

It’s happening! Oh my God it’s happening!

In addition to the interaction with the starter set characters of Batman, Gandalf and Wyldstyle, the trailer features a tantalizing crossover with fellow Doctor Emmett Brown and the town of Hill Valley from Back to the Future. With the Daleks, the Cybermen and a few other friends at the end, the best advice for watching this video is…don’t blink.

At San Diego Comic Con, an event with the cast of the show revealed that not only will Peter Capaldi lend his voice to the game, but Jenna Coleman will appear as Clara and Michelle Gomez as The Master.  The playset as shown in previous photos features The Doctor, the TARDIS, and Baker-era companion K-9. No product information has been shared concerning physical figures of Clara or Missy, though Dalek and Cyberman figures will be made available as a Fun Pack, currently scheduled for January.

maxresdefault-7044445

Of all the properties appearing in Lego Dimensions, none more than Doctor has the potential to feature additional figures and playsets.  So far only the three-figure Dimensions set has been announced, and along with Portal, will be featuring a stand-alone playset through their Lego Ideas line.   An article at Gamespot.com reveals a staggering amount of screenshots and potential gameplay, suggesting that there may be more game available than first expected.

Lego Dimensions will be released on September 27.

Dennis O’Neil: The Grand Old Flags

captain-confederacyIt’s certainly flaggy out there, isn’t it. Flags in the news and flags in the environment.

That’s business as usual at this time of year, of course. The Fourth of July – time to celebrate our nation’s birthday and the way many of us do that is to stick what some call “Old Glory” onto porches and poles, if we can find them.

Then there’s that other flag, the one that’s been in the news. Call it the “Stars and Bars” and you can probably find someone who’ll nod in agreement. But that flag isn’t so much going up as coming down. It’s partisans say that although old S&B merely celebrates the south’s heritage and traditions, nobody can deny that the thing is the battle flag of an army that sought to overthrow the federal government and preserve the institution of slavery. Heap on all the genteel verbal niceties in your repertoire and you still won’t obliterate that nasty slavery business.

But isn’t the First Amendment the crown jewel of our national documentation and doesn’t it guarantee freedom of speech and isn’t flying the flag of my preference an exercise of that freedom? What happened in Georgia – that mass murderer perpetuated by a racist who presumably has no problem with slavery and posed for a photo with old S&B… sure, that was terrible, some would say, but remember freedom of speech! You can’t make me take down my flag!

There really isn’t a big problem here. I can’t, and would not, insist you strike the Stars and Bars that flies on your property, even though I despise its meaning. But flying it on state property is another matter. The conflation of flag and government has to mean that the government approves of what the flag stands for, that it represents national ideals, and the Stars and Bars was created to signify an approval of slavery.

As for Old Glory…if you’re in uniform, you’d better salute it. There might be an officer watching. Treat that flag with reverence, mister!

Or don’t. I never quite understood flag worship. When I was a nipper, I learned (from the Boy Scouts?) that the flag should be accorded almost as much reverence as we proffered to the consecrated host at Mass. There were rules about when it was to be raised and lowered, how it should be folded – and never, never should it be allowed to touch the ground, any more than the host would be accorded such indignity. I don’t think wearing a Scout uniform obligated one to salute Old Glory. But I dunno..better safe than sorry?

What about superheroes? Do they have to salute? Their work clothes are sometimes called “uniforms,” after all. But no. Those aren’t uniforms. “Uniform,” after all, means a style of dress worn so members of an organization – usually a military or law-enforcing group – can identify one another and the status of the wearer within that group. Although there are exceptions, most superhero suits are unique, intended to signify the also unique individuals wearing them.

As for those exceptions: do you really think you wouldn’t be able to tell Superman from Supergirl because they sported similar threads? Or the Thing from the Human Torch?

No, those aren’t superhero uniforms. They’re costumes. Really different things. On behalf of English majors everywhere, I implore you to get it right.

Still, if you’re a superdoer and you happen to be passing a flag…better safe than sorry?

 

0

Comics Reviews (July 8th, 2015)

First of all, these reviews are now being cross-posted to ComicMix, which means I should possibly introduce myself for the people who just clicked on a link there and found themselves here. So, hi everyone. I’m Phil Sandifer, this is my blog. It’s a geek media blog, running a history of British comics called The Last War in Albion on Fridays, a rotating feature (currently a Game of Thrones blog, switching over to an occultism-tinged take on the Super Nintendo in a few weeks) on Mondays, and occasional other features, currently including weekly reviews of Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell. It’s also got the archives of TARDIS Eruditorum, a sprawling history of Doctor Who. And, obviously, on Wednesday, new comics reviews.

We keep the lights on here via a Patreon , and if you enjoy the site, I ask that you consider kicking a dollar a week my way.

Reviews tend not to involve giving a letter or number grade to things, but instead ranking them relative to each other. So these, as with every week, are ordered from the worst to the best, with the caveat that I paid my own money for all of them, whether out of an expectation of quality or out of the bleak pathology that is comics fandom. Except that’s a lie this week, which we’ll get to. But first:

The Amazing Spider-Man: Renew Your Vows #2

The problem – which was present in the first issue, but largely overshadowed by the sheer energy of the thing, is that this book gives every sign of trying to have it both ways. It’s unabashedly aimed at the still-vocal chunk of comics fandom who appreciated that our version (and yes, I just gave away my allegiances) of Spider-Man was married; who thought that was an interesting way to set the comics version of a pop culture icon apart from all the others. But it’s also seeming to set up a critique of the structure, being based on how having a family necessitates reconceptualizing Peter as the sort of person who says, “that’s what daddies do. We do anything to keep our families safe. ANYTHING.” And who then has nightmares about the awful things he’s done already. As I said, in the first issue of this things moved fast enough that you could avoid dwelling on this contradiction. Here… they don’t, resulting in the unsatisfying spectacle of a comic that’s primarily about the tension of whether or not it’s going to be an insult to the readers it’s marketed to.

Archie #1

I got an advance review copy of this, and it was not purchased. I might have picked it up, especially given that this was a light week, but we’ll never truly know.

In any case, it’s pretty good, but unable to escape the gravity of its own futility. Which is to say that, quite aside from any ethical issues about the relationship between Archie Comics, the direct market, and crowdfunding, let’s not forget the fact that the abandoned Kickstarter for these Archie books was never going to meet goal. Which is to say that, culturally, we do not give a shit about Archie right now. He’s an archetypal example of the popular culture icon famous for being famous. Nobody actually likes Archie.

So here we have Mark Waid and Fiona Staples writing a comic that’s trying desperately to change that. It’s a good team. Staples is a great artist, as Saga proves, and she does well here. It’s going to be very depressing when her three issues are done and whoever replaces her suddenly whitewashes Riverdale. Waid writes a competent high school romance. But… at the end of the day, you’re still stuck with a property defined by the fact that it established many of the cliches of its genre many, many decades ago, as opposed to by the fact that anyone has come up with anything interesting to say about it today.

Doctor Who: The Eleventh Doctor #14

I admit, I’ve not been thrilled with the arc on this book since ServeYouInc was defeated. The lack of a villain leaves it feeling a bit directionless. Here the plot meanders through some sort of inchoate cosmic crisis, with the emotional heft coming from the idea of the TARDIS getting mad and abandoning the Doctor, deeming him “unworthy.”

Sadly, one does not expect Matt Smith to regenerate into a woman in response to being deemed unworthy. The final page cliffhanger is interesting, but one doubts the licensing will let Titan actually explore its implications in a meaningful way, so the result is a sort of reversion to the mean for Doctor Who comics, as opposed to the sort of thing that has in the past made this an extraordinary run of them.

Saga #30

I actually followed what happened in this issue, which is a pleasant change from my usual “wait, who are all these people that aren’t Marko, Alana, and their daughter again” reaction to this comic. The ends of arcs tend to do that with Saga for me – it gets flabby in the middle sections, but any time the narration kicks up I tend to be pretty happy with it. So basically, a rare case of Vaughn not writing for the trade.

Injection #3

It’s increasingly clear that Injection is one of those periodic Warren Ellis comics that amount to him creating a narrative container for dumping his current cultural and intellectual obsessions into. These are often a bit narratively messy, and this is no exception; Ellis is being willfully leisurely introducing his cast (this is the first point there’s any sort of roll call, such that I now want to dig up #1 and #2 with an eye towards actually knowing who these people are), and most of them are just standard Ellis characters anyway. And, of course, Ellis has now released most of the underlying ideas here as an ebook collection of his recent lectures.

Doesn’t matter. Warren Ellis in a philosophical mood is just one of those things that always works in comics. And this is a prime example.

Providence #2

The methodical slow burn of this continues, with the supernatural finally making its first decisive interjection (and note the way the panel layout shifts as Robert goes underground). This is very much a late career Alan Moore masterpiece, long on allusion and philosophical digression, requiring an hour or so of Googling to fully appreciate, and with a lengthy text piece to boot. Which is good. I mean, this is actually a comic one will plausibly get its cover price ($4.99) worth of value from, which is more than you can say for anything else on the list this week. If nothing else, it’s a comic where Lovecraftian horror is a metaphor for being gay and also for horrifying and impossible caverns beneath the earth full of unfathomable monsters.

Originally published on PhilipSandifer.com.

Categories

Archives

Everything you need to make great comics!

comicmix-pro-300x69-2

Nucleus X

Bookshop Zaks