Sometimes it's easier just to react to others' reactions:
- Newsweek (link courtesy Kevin
Melrose) gives an overall positive review to the first issue of Michael
Chabon Presents: The Amazing Adventures of the Escapist.
It's a somewhat schizophrenic review, opening with effusive praise such
as " [t]he new Escapist comic takes this celebration [of the real-life
Kavaliers and Clays] to the next level" but then petering out into
more guarded evaluations such as "in trying to introduce us to the
comic’s characters and fictionalized history, the collection almost
forgets one of the most important things about Kavalier and Clay’s work
together: their openness to experimentation and innovation."
Personally, I thought the comic was dull. There's really no
innovation to speak of: Putting a new character into tired old
scenarios does not count as "innovation." Then again, I was never
that big a fan of the original novel, nor am I very tickled by the
"novel" conceit of pretending that these fictional comics once actually
existed, so I might not be the most receptive reader for this project.
- Bill
Sherman and Neilalien both liked Epic Anthology #1 (or at least two out of the
three serials). Me, I thought it was lousy, and I only paid $1.50
for it. The nicest things I can say about the book are (1) I
liked Andy Kuhn's art in "Young Ancient One" and (2) Greg Scott's art
in "Strange Magic" was stronger than his fill-in art in Gotham
Central #16. But aside from the art, none of the stories
interested me in the slightest so I can't say I'm sorry to see this
title end. Yes, I'm someone who has often called for more comic
publishers to experiment with anthology formats, but the material has
to be stronger than this for the effort to have a chance of success.
- What's with all the Hard Time hate? Granted, I've only read the first issue so far, but I
didn't think the story was "terrible." Christopher
Butcher writes
that "[a]nyone who’s ever seen an episode of LAW & ORDER can see
right through this piece of crap." I'm not sure what that means,
but I'm guessing that Butcher had problems with some of the procedural
elements of this story. Yeah, I was wondering how Ethan could be
convicted when it's made clear that there's little or no evidence
against him (in fact, Ethan's lawyer states that even the police admit
that Ethan's gun was never fired), but knowing how screwed up
our real-world legal system can be (thanks to books like Closed
Chambers and movies like Capturing
the Friedmans), I don't find it that implausible that a jury
and
judge would convict and sentence based on emotion rather than
facts.
Another complaint I've read is that the book is overly melodramatic, with side characters often reduced to mere caricatures. I understand where this criticism is coming from (the panel that Greg McElhatton reproduces of the jock insulting the assailants on camera is an example that stood out to me as well) but it doesn't bother me as much as it does others. Yes, I agree that the dialogue isn't very realistic (it's hard to believe that even the dumbest of dumb jocks would be clueless enough to say something like that on camera), but I don't know if Gerber intended for the dialogue to come across as naturalistic. I'm assuming Gerber is using Hard Time as a platform from which to offer some pessimistic observations about contemporary culture. Thus, some characters are going to be used as mouthpieces for various points of view in much the same way that Frank Miller employed his "talking heads" device in Dark Knight Returns. I can see how it's distracting, but I also think it works when viewed from another perspective. (For example, the jock's line about Ethan and his friend being "a couple of nothin's" who "had no reason" to do what they did reveals a lack of empathy that might underlie actual bullying)
Personally, I enjoyed Hard Time and I'm looking forward to seeing how the series develops. I think Gerber has succeeded in creating a complex and intriguing character in Ethan -- one who's sympathetic but also obviously flawed. I'm not sure Gerber is going to invest any more time in Ethan's backstory, but I'd be interested to learn what events drove him and his friend to threatening the entire school. (Perhaps Gerber will just leave those events unspecified, allowing the readers to fill in the blanks on their own.)
Plus, Brian Hurtt's artwork is great.
(For other positive takes on Hard Time, check out the reviews from Paul O'Brien and Don MacPherson.)
