The Aptly Named Castle Waiting
Whatever happened to CASTLE WAITING: THE LUCKY ROAD?  Dark Horse solicited it back in January but it never came out.  Not only that, but it no longer appears on Dark Horse's website.  I did a cursory Google search but I didn't see anything about it being cancelled.  And I know I'm not imagining the book being solicited because Johanna Draper Carlson mentioned it in her Previews Review for that month, too.  This isn't the first book I've pre-ordered from Dark Horse that never showed up, either.  I was looking forward to Club 9 Volume 3 (listed on Amazon as "CURRENTLY NOT AVAILABLE") but that book has vanished from Dark Horse's website as well.  With Club 9 (which is still being serialized in Super Manga Blast!) I'd guessed that Dark Horse -- after their purchase of Studio Proteus -- was planning on retooling the series in an unflipped format, but I have no idea why Castle Waiting has been delayed/removed from the schedule.  Anyone heard anything?  And what does this mean for the "new, ongoing Castle Waiting series" that the Dark Horse trade supposedly heralded?
  ¶ 11:24 PM | |

  Help Prevent Linkrot
Here's an oldie but a goodie.  (Originally posted on the Comic Book Galaxy Forum but since deleted.  For other sites -- such as Fanboy Rampage and The Beat! -- that linked to the original version of this thread, feel free to point those links to this entry now.)

John Jakala Joined: 05 Aug 2004 Posts: 8	Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2004 9:04 pm    Post subject: Geoff Johns: Threat or Menace? Alan - I've been discussing this a bit with Chris Allen over on my blog, but I thought I'd stop over here and ask you directly: So what's your beef with Geoff Johns? I get that you don't like his work, that you think it's mediocre and perhaps too highly valued by many fans, but I'm confused by your desire to see him removed from the industry "by any means necessary." Am I taking your statements too literally here? Are you exaggerating for hyperbolic effect? If not, I guess I just don't understand the wish for someone to be booted from the industry. _________________ John Jakala Grotesque Anatomy: • The Blog • The Forum
ADD Joined: 29 Jul 2004 Posts: 37	Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2004 10:01 pm    Post subject: Re: Geoff Johns: Threat or Menace? John, There are plenty of people that should be booted from the industry, it's just that Johns should be the first to go. More than any other mediocre writer, he has been given free reign to misguide the fates of a number of icons like The Flash, JSA and Avengers, making them unreadable for anyone who wants more than just shambling avatars stumbling through their superhero comics. He writes characters that, at their best, I have enjoyed a great deal over the years, and currently none of them are any goddamned good at all. Believe me, I would LOVE to have good Flash comics to read. I'd love me SON, who loves the character from the JLA cartoon, to be able to read his adventures in comics. But with Johns's one-note sadism holding the title hostage, there's nothing to be done but to try to point out that this particular fucking emporer has no goddamned clothes. Christ, at least Chuck Austen sucks in interesting ways. ADD
John Jakala Joined: 05 Aug 2004 Posts: 8	Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2004 10:59 pm    Post subject: Alan, How is your attitude any different from those fanboys who bemoaned that Morrison was "ruining" the X-Men with his weird, trippy ideas? If you're not enjoying what so-and-so is doing on a certain title, isn't the best course of action to find another comic that *does* give you the buzz you're looking for? Why does it have to be The Flash that delivers the thrills? You're pretty plugged in to the comics scene: Couldn't the fact that Flash has become unreadable for you free up time and money to devote to other books? And what about all the people who *are* enjoying what Johns is doing on Flash, JSA, etc.? Doesn't their enjoyment factor into the equation at all? I hope you don't mind my pressing this issue, but I'm genuinely perplexed by your take on this. _________________ John Jakala Grotesque Anatomy: • The Blog • The Forum
ADD Joined: 29 Jul 2004 Posts: 37	Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2004 5:38 am    Post subject: John, If you honestly can't detect a qualitative difference between the work of Grant Morrison and Geoff Johns, then there's no point whatsoever in discussing this. But if it makes you feel better, sure, there's no difference, Morrison and Johns are creative equals and JSA is every bit as nuanced, intelligent and compelling as THE FILTH, THE INVISIBLES, ANIMAL MAN, KILL YOUR BOYFRIEND, SEBASTIAN O, ST. SWITHIN'S DAY and of course NEW X-MEN. Silly, ain't it? I hadn't pegged you as one of those people who gets nervous and defensive when someone like me states the truth passionately, John, and I hope I'm wrong, because I like what you do. ADD
ADD Joined: 29 Jul 2004 Posts: 37	Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2004 9:57 am    Post subject: Re: Geoff Johns: Threat or Menace? Here you go, John, my final thought on this topic for the time being: http://www.comicbookgalaxy.com/blog/2004/08/persistent-sucking-of- geoff-Johns-john.html Thanks. ADD
John Jakala Joined: 05 Aug 2004 Posts: 8	Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2004 7:26 pm    Post subject: Alan - My point wasn't that the works of Morrison and Johns are on equal footing but that your reaction to Johns' mediocrity on FLASH struck me as similar to rabid fanboys' defensive reaction to Morrison's "weirdness" on NXM. If you're not digging Morrison on NXM, seek out something else you *do* dig. If you're not enjoying Johns on FLASH, go read something else that *does* tickle your superhero funny bone. (And if you're really upset that The Flash as a particular character is unreadable in his monthly title, search out some back issues on eBay that are more to your liking. Heck, I'll send you my copy of THE FLASH ARCHIVES if you'd like it.) I'll grant you for the sake of argument that Johns is a hack, and that his mere competency is somehow the Biggest Threat Facing Comics. I still don't understand why anyone should expend any energy toward removing him from comics. Yes, write about his work from time to time; point out all the ways he offends the more developed and refined critical faculties; recommend other works that are better worth readers' time and money. But don't pretend (1) that repeated ranting about Johns will get others who have reflected upon his work and legitimately enjoy it (for whatever reason) to stop buying his work; or (2) that removing Johns (and everyone else somehow determined to be substandard) will magically elevate comics to a medium where Only Good Works grace the shelves. Non-genius, mindless entertainment will still find its way into the marketplace, Johns or no Johns. I find it interesting that Mark Millar makes your list of approved superhero comic book writers. I haven't read Johns' FLASH, so I'm not sure how sadomasochistic it is, but I have read parts of Millar's ULTIMATES and ULTIMATE X-MEN and SPIDER-MAN and those all seem pretty sadistic and brutal to me. Isn't Millar's approach on books meant to serve as entry-level titles totally inappropriate given that the featured characters appear in movies and other media geared toward children? And I apologize for my being nervous and defensive: It's not so much that the truth scares me, even when passionately expressed; it's all the Comic Book Orange Alerts and other hysterical tactics that unnerve me. _________________ John Jakala Grotesque Anatomy: • The Blog • The Forum
ADD Joined: 29 Jul 2004 Posts: 37	Posted: Sat Aug 07, 2004 8:30 am    Post subject: "If you're not enjoying Johns on FLASH, go read something else that *does* tickle your superhero funny bone." John, I agree that this is a good policy for the average comic book reader. My opinion of Johns comes almost entirely by way of review copies I've been sent or the occasional issue I've bought because I was interested in an art change (Porter on Flash) or to investigate the buzz (JSA and Hawkman, gak). I'd also note that, as someone who runs a website about comic books (oh, my mum woulda been so proud), I feel some responsibility to stay aware of what is going on in the varioous segments of the industry. "(And if you're really upset that The Flash as a particular character is unreadable in his monthly title, search out some back issues on eBay that are more to your liking. Heck, I'll send you my copy of THE FLASH ARCHIVES if you'd like it.)" As I have mentioned more than once, I'm most interested in the Flash as an entry-level superhero for all ages, which is what he has been for 95 percent of his history. And mostly for my son, who would seriously love some Flash comics that are fun and exciting and inventive and don't have people peeling the flesh off their own faces and sewing their lips closed. So if you'd like to send the Flash Archives volume for him, John, I'm not gonna say no. "I'll grant you for the sake of argument that Johns is a hack, and that his mere competency is somehow the Biggest Threat Facing Comics." The biggest threat facing comics is not Geoff Johns. He isn't even in the top 100 biggest threats facing comics. He is just the Biggest Bore in the Wizard Top Ten, which is generally PACKED with bores, so it's really quite an accomplishment. "I still don't understand why anyone should expend any energy toward removing him from comics." Honestly, John, how much energy do you think I've expended? Do you envision me organizing pickets and benefit concerts and going door to door to decry him to the hoi polloi? While it's funny to imagine, in truth I have mentioned it a time or two in the context of writing about what IS good in comics, and frankly, it didn't take that much energy at all. And I personally find it worthwhile, when pointing out what IS good in superhero comics (Brubaker, Moore, Cooke, Morrison, often Bendis, Ellis, Millar, occasionally even Joe Casey), I find it helps to also discuss what is mediocre and lifeless, especially when something that is as, yes, soporific as the majority of Johns's comics are still manage to sell in the tens of thousands, while better and more creative and more engaging comics languish in obscurity. It's grating, I admit it. But talking about the dichotomy allows a writer to compare and contrast, which you may have heard is a valid technique in discussing two elements that share similar properties (Johns and Morisson are both men who write comics after all, even if the comparison crashes to the ground immediately thereafter). "Don't pretend (1) that repeated ranting about Johns will get others who have reflected upon his work and legitimately enjoy it (for whatever reason) to stop buying his work; or (2) that removing Johns (and everyone else somehow determined to be substandard) will magically elevate comics to a medium where Only Good Works grace the shelves." Actually, John, having been doing this for about a half-decade now, I HAVE had readers write to me to tell me that my writing finally got them to take a look at their pull list and more honestly evaluate how much they aren't enjoying marginal works. You may not care for my technique, and that's fine; as you suggest to me, if you're not enjoying it, move on. There's plenty of other stuff about comics to read on "This, the comics internet." "I find it interesting that Mark Millar makes your list of approved superhero comic book writers." Thanks for the condescension. I'm trying to keep this civil, because as I've said, John, I like what you do, and more to the point, to the degree that we've interacted over "This, the comics internet," I like you personally. That said, if you can find a place where I have posted my "List of Approved Superhero Writers," I'll gladly pay you $1000.00. Just because I have a list in my head of writers whose superhero work I enjoy more than others, and just because I share that list with my readers in an informal manner (NOT as the List of Approved Superhero Writers you speak of), does not mean that this is received wisdom that I assume All Right Thinking Mammals Share. Here's a big revelation, John: EVERYTHING I WRITE IS MY OPINION. Feel free to dismiss or embrace it as you like, as long as you are able to understand it. If you disagree with it, that's great. If you feel it's really important that Geoff Johns Stay in Comics, tell me why. Tell me why the industry wouldn't be better if marginal hacks like him got the fuck out of the way for people with an actual creative spark in their psyches. "I haven't read Johns' FLASH, so I'm not sure how sadomasochistic it is..." Well, it's less nausea-inducing than Frank Tieri's nipple-and-eyeball-eating early years (and you BETTER not think I'm making THAT up), but it's altogether inappropriate for any reader under the age of 14, and I think that's wrong, when as I have mentioned, The Flash is deliberately marketed to kids as part of an animated cartoon series and accompanying line of action figures which are 100 percent kids' stuff. "I have read parts of Millar's ULTIMATES and ULTIMATE X-MEN and SPIDER-MAN and those all seem pretty sadistic and brutal to me." I don't disagree. However in the case of THE ULTIMATES A) They are also done with occasional wit, creativity and genuine entertainment value and B) The Ultimates is aimed primarily at adult readers through trade dress and artistic style. I have children, John, and they're not int he least bit engaged by the look of The Ultimates. They don't want to read it and the art is too complex to intrigue them. The Flash on Cartoon Network is just the opposite. And I'm not going to address Millar's Spider-Man or Ultimate X-Men because in the case of the first I've never read it and in the case of the second, I didn't care for it very much. I don't remember anyone ever peeling the flesh off their faces in it, though the modest sexual overtones (Jean sleeping with Logan) would mark it as a title for strictly 12 and up, I guess. "Isn't Millar's approach on books meant to serve as entry-level titles totally inappropriate given that the featured characters appear in movies and other media geared toward children?" The only purely entry-level Millar book I am aware of is Superman Adventures, which is generally lauded for its all-ages appeal. One final note, John. I've seen this ongoing, blog-and-message-board-spanning discussion of ours described as a "tiff," and again, I hope I'm not coming off as uncivil. I have no desire to insult you or do battle with you. I've tried to respond to your questions because I think it will provide more insight for both of us (and perhaps one or two others) about just why Johns's work is just so damned aggravating. ADD
John Jakala Joined: 05 Aug 2004 Posts: 8	Posted: Sun Aug 08, 2004 10:26 pm    Post subject: Alan - I understand that as a critic who tries to keep his pulse on all aspects of the comic book industry, you feel an obligation to be familiar with writers such as Johns. That's why I said in my earlier post that you should write about Johns' work from time to time. What I don't understand is the desire to remove Johns (or anyone else) from the comic book industry. I don't picture you organizing grass-roots campaigns to remove Johns from comic book office, but I do recall your disparaging Johns repeatedly, most recently in your discussion about Moore and Morrison and in your review of EIGHTBALL #23 ("the majority of people who buy comics and support their local comics shops, want nothing more than to be comforted by the type of shit Geoff Johns can squeeze out in his deep and dreamless sleep"). Your devoting all that space to deriding Johns is what I meant by "expending energy." I know it's not much, but that's kind of my point: Even that infinitesimal bit of energy seems wasted to me, for the two reasons I've already mentioned. I'm sure there are readers whom you've managed to sway by pointing out something they hadn't considered before. But I was referring to readers "who have reflected upon his work and legitimately enjoy it" such as Shane Bailey. Unless you're going to start arguing that such readers have deluded themselves into a state of False Consciousness, I think it's best simply to let those readers have the books they enjoy while you stump for books you feel are better worth their time. And even if you believe that Johns' work is so egregious that it's Harming Comics, I don't think that removing Johns and everyone else who will fit in the U-Haul of Shame will Save Comics: other mediocre writers will rise to take their place. That's why I believe it's a better use of your time to promote good works if your goal is to elevate the medium. (Although even then I think a critic's impact will be small, not sweeping, but I think the positive approach will work better than the negative one.) Again, not saying you shouldn't do reviews of stuff you don't like. On the contrary, I think you should, as it provides your readers with a (negative) baseline by which they can determine your tastes. I'm just saying that I find the effort (or desire) to Improve Comics by removing creators below a certain talent threshold misguided. You may disagree with me (which is fine; in fact, it could lead to an interesting discussion about the role and reach of criticism in any field) but I just want to make sure we're talking about the same thing here. ADD wrote: I've seen this ongoing, blog-and-message-board-spanning discussion of ours described as a "tiff," and again, I hope I'm not coming off as uncivil. I have no desire to insult you or do battle with you. Well, our discussion appeared on Fanboy Rampage, so it must be a tiff! Seriously, I don't much mind if you take jabs at me. For one thing, I think everyone knows that if you get into a disagreement with Alan David Doane, you can expect some cutting remarks coming your way, so I can't say that I didn't know the risks going in. For another thing, a certain amount of conflict can make an otherwise dull debate lively and engaging for other readers. (Plus, it gives me an excuse to indulge in my own rhetorical flourishes.) The only thing that does irk me is when you write things such as: Quote: "If you honestly can't detect a qualitative difference between the work of Grant Morrison and Geoff Johns, then there's no point whatsoever in discussing this." "I hadn't pegged you as one of those people who gets nervous and defensive when someone like me states the truth passionately, John, and I hope I'm wrong, because I like what you do." "talking about the dichotomy allows a writer to compare and contrast, which you may have heard is a valid technique in discussing two elements that share similar properties" "Here's a big revelation, John: EVERYTHING I WRITE IS MY OPINION. Feel free to dismiss or embrace it as you like, as long as you are able to understand it." and then claim you've been nothing but civil all along. Again, I don't mind you getting some barbs in, but at least be honest about it. Your trying to play the wounded martyr in all this is the only thing that does insult me. Now on to the ways in which I've offended. I'm not sure how my statement "I find it interesting that Mark Millar makes your list of approved superhero comic book writers" was condescending. (A bit sarcastic, yes, but condescending, no.) I thought the list of comic book creators you mentioned positively was in contrast to those writers whose work on superhero comics you disapprove of, so I referred to it as "your list of approved superhero comic book writers." You may say that you were only offering the list in an "informal manner" but when you're contrasting that list with writers whose "true destiny" is to work at Wendy's, writers whom you're eager to kick out of the comic book industry, I think it's easy to see where readers might get the impression that you view your personal list as more than just some humble suggestion. No, you didn't refer to it as your list of Officially Sanctioned Superhero Writers, but I thought the overall tone of your post was going in that direction, so using the term "approved" (which can mean either "thought of favorably" or, more strongly, "given authoritative endorsement") struck me as an appropriate way to take issue with the elitism I perceived in your post. Again, I don't mind your rhetoric, but I do mind when you use it and later attempt to disown it. And if I can't poke fun at your excesses, where's the sport in that? I know it's your opinion -- even when stated in such a grandiose manner ("anyone looking for actual creative energy to be expended in the creation of these sooperhero funnybook entertainments" will likewise be bored by Johns' soporific work, just as you were, otherwise they're obviously not concerned with "actual creative energy") -- that's why I referred to it as your list (not Wizard's or The One True List). I just thought Mark Millar's inclusion on that list was odd given your stated reasons for feeling Johns was inappropriate for working on superhero comics. (It's also interesting that one of the other creators on your list -- Darwyn Cooke -- has expressed similar misgivings about Millar's superhero work.) So here's where you mentioned your list of approved superhero writers. Do I get the thousand bucks in one lump sum or in installments? ;) ADD wrote: The only purely entry-level Millar book I am aware of is Superman Adventures, which is generally lauded for its all-ages appeal. Well, I'm not sure how a book is determined to be "purely entry-level," but let's stipulate for the moment that it has something to do with its content and presentation. If that's the case, then isn't Johns' FLASH just as demarcated as non-entry-level as Millar's ULTIMATES and other books are? (Just as Jean's sleeping with Logan marked Millar's ULTIMATE X-MEN as a title geared toward ages 12+, doesn't the peeling of flesh and sewing of lips in FLASH signal to you that that book is meant for a certain age-level?) And doesn't The Flash appear in DC's Justice League tie-in comic, with an artistic style closely matching that of the cartoon, so that you do have an entry-level comic featuring The Flash for your son? (And I know you said you haven't read Millar's SPIDER-MAN, but a recent issue I flipped through had the Vulture's face being brutally disfigured by the Black Cat. But perhaps the Dodsons' artistic style doesn't appeal to younger children; I don't know.) ADD wrote: You may not care for my technique, and that's fine; as you suggest to me, if you're not enjoying it, move on. There's plenty of other stuff about comics to read on "This, the comics internet." But you're one of those most widely-read online comics pundits! I have to react to you! ;) And even if I didn't enjoy reading your work, I would never suggest that you should be removed from the comics opinionosphere. I might cry into my beer, pitifully bemoaning the fact that I don't have anywhere near the audience or influence you do, but I'd never wish for your removal. How could I? When I disagree with you, it spawns fun monster threads like this one! ADD wrote: If you disagree with it, that's great. If you feel it's really important that Geoff Johns Stay in Comics, tell me why. Tell me why the industry wouldn't be better if marginal hacks like him got the fuck out of the way for people with an actual creative spark in their psyches. I don't think it's really important that Geoff Johns Stay in Comics, just as I don't think it's really important that Geoff Johns Be Forcibly Removed from Comics, or that everyone be as clever and innovative as Moore and Morrison. Perhaps it's a bit pessimistic of me (I prefer to view it as pragmatic), but I don't think the comics medium -- or any medium -- will ever be made artistically ideal (whatever that would mean). Furthermore, I don't even know if that's a healthy goal, thinking mainly in economic terms. Looking at other industries, crap sells. Furthermore, one person's crap is another person's -- well, not treasure, but enjoyable fluff at the very least. I know I'd much rather read Johns' JSA than anything by Bendis or Millar, but I don't think Bendis or Millar should be banished from comics because of that. And even if we could banish all the creators we disliked, I'm guessing they'd mostly be replaced by other creators we disliked, not creators who resonated with us 100% of the time. Really, shouldn't you be happier that the market more closely reflects your tastes than mine? After all, Bendis and Millar both write books that outsell Johns's work by a wide margin each month. You should be celebrating! I'm the one who should be getting the U-Haul ready! ADD wrote: The biggest threat facing comics is not Geoff Johns. He isn't even in the top 100 biggest threats facing comics. I'm sensing a fun new list for The Comics Journal to work on. ;) ADD wrote: I like what you do, and more to the point, to the degree that we've interacted over "This, the comics internet," I like you personally. Aw, shucks, ya big lug. You had to go and get all mushy on me, dincha? And I've enjoyed our interaction, too. Just because things may be getting a little more heated between us than they have in the past doesn't mean I'm getting ready to delete you from my blogroll or anything. Heck, if impassioned arguments led to denouncing one's sparring partners, then Chris Hunter and I would have parted ways long ago. (HA HA HA! I love working in gratuitous jabs at Hunter!) ADD wrote: So if you'd like to send the Flash Archives volume for him, John, I'm not gonna say no. Will do! I'll email you off-forum to make sure I still have your current address. I haven't read all the stories yet, so I can't guarantee there are no scenes of people peeling the flesh off their own faces or sewing their lips closed, but it's the Silver Age, so if there are, I'm sure they're pretty tame by today's standards. _________________ John Jakala Grotesque Anatomy: • The Blog • The Forum
Graeme McMillan Guest	Posted: Sun Aug 08, 2004 10:45 pm    Post subject: John Jakala wrote: Well, our discussion appeared on Fanboy Rampage, so it must be a tiff! It's a clash, goddammit. And, ADD? You owe John some money, if you ask me. Because, saying this: ADD wrote: ...when pointing out what IS good in superhero comics (Brubaker, Moore, Cooke, Morrison, often Bendis, Ellis, Millar, occasionally even Joe Casey)... and naming names like you did looks suspiciously like that list of your Approved Superhero Writers that you promised to pay John $1000.00 for, if he pointed one out to you later in the same post. But if John doesn't want the money, I'll happily take it. Hell, you could even donate it to the CBLDF and I'll be happy.
Chris Hunter Joined: 29 Jul 2004 Posts: 12	Posted: Mon Aug 09, 2004 3:37 am    Post subject: That Scumbag, Fight-Startin' Jakala wrote: Heck, if impassioned arguments led to denouncing one's sparring partners, then Chris Hunter and I would have parted ways long ago. (HA HA HA! I love working in gratuitous jabs at Hunter!) Bastard. _________________ http://panoramically.blogspot.com/
Chris Hunter Joined: 29 Jul 2004 Posts: 12	Posted: Mon Aug 09, 2004 8:34 pm    Post subject: ADD wrote: As I have mentioned more than once, I'm most interested in the Flash as an entry-level superhero for all ages, which is what he has been for 95 percent of his history. And mostly for my son, who would seriously love some Flash comics that are fun and exciting and inventive and don't have people peeling the flesh off their own faces and sewing their lips closed. I have an honest question about this for you, Alan. I completely understand your point about The Flash being entry level/all ages fun and that the way that it's currently written, it's not that at all. My question is this: do you feel that all of the blame for that should rest on Johns? I ask because, ultimately, The Flash is editorially mandated and I feel that Johns isn't completely to blame for the direction of the book. I think that partial blame should rest on the shoulders of the editors as well. What are your thoughts about that? _________________ http://panoramically.blogspot.com/

(Thread found thanks to Google's caching system.)
  ¶ 3:32 PM | |

  In Book One, Mega-Corporation Tokyopop Crushes Puny Company Named 'Marvel'
This looks pretty interesting, and not only because it demonstrates Tokyopop's continued desire to expand into original content.  Perhaps I'm a cynical bastard, but the idea of megacorporations financing wars as profitable entertainment sounds like an intriguing and not-too-far-removed extrapolation of current geopolitics.

Plus, the art by Rising Stars of Manga winner Shane Granger looks pretty good.  Reminds me of a cross between Akimi Yoshida and Katsuhiro Otomo:



For more info on Psy-Comm, check out CBR's Jonah Weiland's interview with series creators Tony Salvaggio and Jason Henderson.
  ¶ 5:24 PM | |

  The Next Olympic Sport
Underwater Ninja Sparring:


I'm guessing this will be the issue featuring the shark attack as well?  (Silly Millar:  Everyone knows sharks aren't as cool as Giant Squids...)
  ¶ 2:35 PM | |

  Fun With Word Balloons
Check out Tim O'Neil's hilarious comic-review-as-comic of Identity Crisis #3.  I think this is how all comic books should be reviewed from now on.  Apparently Tim was really proud of this one, as he posted it twelve times.

Also, in a similar vein, check out the twisted Watchmen Funnies over at Something Awful.
  ¶ 8:41 AM | |

  Oh Glorious Day
Bendis made his surprise announcement at Wizard World Chicago, and it turns out it actually was pretty surprising: all the Marvel and DC characters have suddenly entered the public domain.  Here, I'll let Bendis explain it:

“I think the one mistake that’s being made here is that these are all of our characters – they ‘belong’ to all of us, and if there’s something that we all want to see, you kind of have to say yes."

Sweet!  Well, there is something I know we all want to see, so I say, "Yes!"  A rounding "yes" to my brilliant crossover idea pairing not just two characters but two pairs of characters.  Yes, I'm talking about my long-awaited Power Man/Iron Fist/Blue Beetle/Booster Gold mega-crossover.  It'll be genius!

I expect calls from Marvel and DC representatives shortly to work out the details.

UPDATE:  Alf vs. Black Panther crossover also announced.

UPDATE/ADDENDUM:  Apparently my interpretation of Bendis' shocking announcement was too narrow, as I thought only Marvel and DC characters had entered the public domain.  But as recent news about such projects as Jimmy Corrigan/Jim Corrigan and Dracula/John Constantine/Archie makes clear, in fact all comic book characters are now up for grabs, regardless of publisher.  With that in mind, I can finally move forward on my ambitious Goon/Goom/Goofy/Geek coloso-crossover.  Truly, we have entered a new Golden Age of Comics this day.  Huzzah!
  ¶ 5:33 PM | |

  "For Fear, Greed, And The Curtailment Of Civil Liberties!"
Here's something interesting: TEX!, a political satire comic portraying George W. Bush as a fumbling super-hero.  Based on the interview with TEX!'s creator Joshua Dysart over at Newsarama, I'm not sure what the tone of this comic is going to be like.  Dysart claims the book isn't a mean-spirited partisan attack, but he also refers to the Bush administration as "dumb asses," and over on the TEX! site, Dysart calls Bush a "jerk."  As much as I share Dysart's desire to oust Bush from office, I worry that the satire in TEX! won't exactly be subtle.

Anyway, at least TEX!'s creators are making an effort to appeal to old-school superhero fans, as demonstrated by the cover's riff on the classic "Superman busting out of chains" image:

And I love the idea of Dick Cheney in one of Tony Stark's life-sustaining chest plates:


"The Iron Dick has risen!"  Heh.
  ¶ 11:12 AM | |

  With A Name Like "Super F*uckers" It Has To Be Good


(Thanks to Graeme for pointing this out.)
  ¶ 10:06 PM | |

  ICk
I bought Identity Crisis #3 out of morbid curiosity (I'd heard that another long-time female character is killed off, and, sure enough, one is) only to regret it.  Well, I regret paying four bucks for it and reading it.  But at least it gives me plenty of ammunition to fill up a blog entry.  (And it should be obvious, but SPOILERS, OK?)

Anyway, on to the snark (and remember -- SPOILERS):

I still don't understand why Sue's not dying from carbon monoxide poisoning clears Dr. Light as a suspect.  If Light raped Sue in the past, isn't he capable of killing her however she was actually killed?  (Based on #1, it looks as though she was killed by physical violence, something a rapist would surely be capable of.)

Why, when Dr. Light remembers the JLA piling on him all those years ago, does his memory include Batman?  I was thinking maybe Light was remembering some other battle, but the panel in #3 is identical to the one from #2 aside from the addition of Batman and the mood lighting:

Remember: When hogpiling on a super-villain...

...be sure to leave a little room in case Batman decides he wants to join in.

I'm assuming this will be an Important Plot Point, although I honestly have no idea what it means.  Light's memory has been distorted due to the heroes' reprogramming?  Or someone else (perhaps Phobia and Dr. Moon) added that detail somehow?  (I still think the image of a half-dozen heroes piling on a lone villain is hilarious. Apparently when Ollie says the JLA teaches you to fight, he means the JLA teaches you to hogpile the bad guy with all your superhero buddies.)

I don't understand the dynamics of the fight with Deathstroke.  (Nerd nitpicking in 1..2..)  Why couldn't GL use his power ring to stop Deathstroke right away?

So Supes has selective super-hearing, huh?

Not sure what's going on with Captain Boomerang, or, as he's known in this issue, Captain Red Herring.

God, I hate that cover.  Why Michael Turner gets high-profile assignments like this continues to baffle me.  Look at Ollie's right arm:  It looks as though Ollie suddenly has Puck's dwarfism on that side of his body:

"Stay back, Slade, or the kid gets an arrow in his chest!"

The sad part is I'll know I'll be checking out the next issue, if only to see if **** ****** had just found out she was pregnant before she was killed.
  ¶ 7:22 PM | |

  Things You Don't Want To Read In A Silver Age Comic
(Posted in honor of Identity Crisis, whose third issue goes on sale today!)

NARRATIVE CAPTION:  "Then, as Flash's fingers go into titillating action..."

FLASH:  "He's doing it!  He's stretching up -- like only the Elongated Man could!"

[A couple pages later]  FLASH:  "Yank it, Ralph!  Yank it hard!"

  ¶ 9:11 AM | |

  Like Unto A Thing Of Intermittency
Quote of the Day, from Dave Intermittent:

"Iron Fist is one of the few characters I can think of that can pull off the badass-in-slippers look"

No, wait, I meant to quote another bit (although I do agree with the above sentiment wholeheartedly):

"The choice isn't between reading classics or reading trash; the choice is between reading trash or reading mostly nothing. Get rid of the Flash and you will create not thousands of new readers of the Filth but thousands of people who spend more time playing video games, or watching Friends reruns on TV. Iron Fist gets it; do you?"

I smell a new catchphase / slogan / bumper sticker:  "What Would Iron Fist Do?"  (Of course, Dave is reacting to the conversation (as transcribed by Graeme McMillan) between Power Man and Iron Fist (not a permalink) that's already made its way through the comics blogosphere, so I don't know why I feel as though I have to link to it myself.)
  ¶ 2:20 PM | |

  Extremely Tardy Reviews: 18 Revolutions
One of the more interesting side effects of manga's ever-increasing popularity has been the rise in home-grown manga.  One of the better-known examples of this has been Tokyopop's Rising Stars of Manga contest, where American manga fans compete to have their manga-influenced comics published in Tokyopop's Rising Stars of Manga anthology book.  Winners of that contest have even gone on to be offered book deals by Tokyopop.  But not everyone waits for an established publisher to select her work from multiple contestants.  Some decide to bypass that route and self-publish instead.

One such creator is Rachel Nabors, who has released her collection of manga-style comic shorts, 18 Revolutions (80 B&W Pages • $7 + $3 shipping), under her imprint Manga Punk.  Most of the strips center around Rachel the Great, presumably a not-too-far-removed stand-in for Nabors herself.  How much of the book is straight autobiography is unclear, but Nabors definitely seems to be drawing inspiration from her own life, and the strips take on a welcome authenticity because of it.  For example, early on we are told that Tuna, Rachel the Great's feline companion throughout the book, is based on Nabors' own pet cat, also named Tuna, who died when Nabors was sixteen:


Anyone who's lost a beloved pet can empathize with the emotions expressed on this page, and the emotional honesty expressed imbues later gags (such as a throwaway reference to Tuna as "The Incredible Living Dead Cat") with an unexpected poignancy.  Even the commonplace device of a talking pet takes on added significance, as those who have been close to animals can identify with the notion of attributing thoughts and personality to a pet.

Similarly rooted in reality, the final story "Vive la Revolution!" (by far my favorite) details Rachel's decision to create and publish her own comics.  It's almost an adaptation of The Pulse's interview with Nabors in comic book form, only with even more charm and humor.  Perhaps it's because I'm already one of the Manga Converted, but I found Nabors' story of how shoujo manga inspired her to create comics for girls in the North American market to be a real testament to the powerful diversity provided by manga.  And as a manga reader, I found Nabors' goal of becoming "one of the greatest publishers of girls' comics that the world has ever seen!" suitably shonen in scope.

Between these bookending bits is a range of other stories, most humorous, some maudlin and morose.  My preference was for the lighter stories, where I think Nabors' talent truly shines, but I'll admit I'm probably not the intended audience for the more angst-ridden tales.  In a note preceding one such melodramatic piece, Nabors notes that when the two-pager "Fifteen Revolutions" ran on gURL.com, she received many emails from girls going through similar experiences.  Still, the commonality of an experience doesn't guarantee that it's handled well when it's transformed into art, and the piece came across as a trite example of bad teen poetry for me.  That said, a later exploration of isolation and alienation ("Atrophy") is much stronger, and any embarrassing moments are undercut by the self-deprecating ending.

The weakest part of the book is the art, which is often rough and inconsistent.  Much of the inconsistency can be explained by the fact that Nabors drew these strips over a four-year period between the ages of fifteen and eighteen, so Nabors obviously has plenty of time to improve her craft.  However, when one reads 18 Revolutions as a finished, published work competing for one's comic book dollar, it's hard not to be critical of the work as it appears on the page.  One especially distracting problem is the lack of anatomical understanding underlying the figures.  I know Nabors' style is more expressive and cartoony, but a simple technique can't be used to cover up deficiencies in one's art.  (If anything, such a stripped-down style makes any weaknesses that much more pronounced.)  Even allowing for the manga convention of superdeformed (SD) characters, Nabors' figures often appear twisted and misproportioned, with necks that don't quite fit and arms that appear to bend in any direction.

Criticism about the art aside, 18 Revolutions is an engaging initial effort from a young creator.  Although some technical aspects of her work could use more polish, Nabors' storytelling instincts are impressively mature.  Her sense of humor and playfulness (both very important in manga) are well-developed and on full display here.  Frankly, I'd be more concerned if these "intangibles" didn't work, but they do.  Anatomy can be learned, but a unique voice can't.  Based on this debut work, I'm optimistic that Nabors' future work will deliver on the promise contained in these pages.
  ¶ 9:36 AM | |

  Drunk On Mad Ideas
The V invent the Warren Ellis Drinking Game:

After just reading PLANETARY 20 and ULTIMATE FANTASTIC FOUR 9, I think a drinking game is long overdue. SO! When you read a Warren Ellis comic, take a drink every time:

* One of Warren's friends is mentioned. Two if it's a goth fetish model.
* Futurephone technology is mentioned. Two if it saves the day somehow.
* Someone mentions how going into space is Extremely Important.

*Female character makes reference to her love of rough/kinky sex.
*Male character makes reference to female character's love of rough/kinky sex.
*Someone mentions how the villain(s) have fucked with the population. Twice if the character actually says "fucked with us."

The BAD SIGNAL drinking game.

"Today, I was contacted by an old
acquaintance to briefly consult on
a possible comics magazine that'd
be released and sold online as a PDF."

Take a walk to your nearest whisky specialist shop (or supermarket if you must), open a bottle of their finest and start to drink, saying "FUGGOFFYERBASTID. AHMWORRINNELLZ!" and pointing to your genital area, whenever WE comes up with a brilliant idea that someone else thought of first.

Offer the security guard a share of your bottle if WE fails to mention the earlier manifestation of this idea.

Drop your trousers, lie face down and insert the bottle if he mentions that he was kneejerkingly dismissive of this idea when that someone else raised the issue a few years ago.

The thread also contains a discussion about Garth Ennis' tendency to use sexual perversion as a shorthand for evil, as well as a hilarious idea for a DC Fifth Week Event:

Ra's al-Ghul steals the Batphone and begins crank calling every hero in the DCU. Fifth Week Event! "My Enemy, My Phone..."

"Is this Wally West? You know where Gorilla Grodd sits? WHEREVER HE WANTS! Har har!" -click- "Is this Bruce Wayne? Do you like bats? WELL MAYBE YOU SHOULD BE A BASEBALL PLAYER THEN! Har har!" -click- "Hello, Clark Kent...?"

I can't be the only one who would buy that, can I?
  ¶ 10:42 PM | |

  Geoff Johns, Arctic Shit-Knife Peddler
So I finally read Comic Book Galaxy's latest feature, The Conversation (pretty much what it says: a conversation between Chris Allen and Alan David Doane about comics) and early on I was distracted by this question:  What is it with ADD and Geoff Johns?

"Mediocre hacks like Geoff Johns [later referred to as an 'industry leech' and 'shit-peddler'] ...really ought to be thrown out of comics by any means necessary"

Isn't it enough that if you don't like someone like Johns, you don't read his work?  Personally, I liked Johns' JSA, up until it became one big "arc" after another.  I liked the series more when it was focusing on the dynamics between the characters, rather than on the next Big Threat.  But when I stopped enjoying JSA, I simply dropped it.  I didn't call for Johns' head on a platter.

I guess ADD should be given points for coming up with a figure emblematic of All That Is Wrong With Comics other than Chuck Austen, at least.

(I also find it ironic that Johns is crucified in the column while a lousy, incoherent comic like Terra Obscura gets a pass simply because it's part of the Alan Moore ABC imprint, even though Moore himself didn't have much to do with it.  Hmm.  Makes me wonder what ADD thought of Geoff Johns' issue of Tom Strong?  I know he was dreading it before it came out, but I wonder if he hated it as much as he expected to.)
  ¶ 12:33 PM | |

  Please, Won't Someone Think Of The Children?
In a sure sign of the Apocalypse, I'm now blogging about the comments on Graeme's blog.  This thread has taken on a life of its own, passing 100 comments with no sign of slowing down.  It stems from some pros' reactions to Michael Chabon's Eisner keynote speech but it's spiraled into a big debate on Kids and Comics (sample topics:  Do kids read comics?  Should kids read comics?  Are there enough comics for kids?  If not, whose fault is it?).   Anyway, what I love most about the thread is how angry everyone is:

"that's fucking stupid."

"This entire thread makes me want to rip the pulsing hearts from the chests of half of you."

"wow, talk about your wretched hive of scum and villainy, huh?"

"It's not helpful. It's reactionary and makes you sound like a moron."

Why are comic fans so hostile?  It's like we learned social interaction from Marvel comics:  When two characters meet, they must fight.  (No, I don't have anything substantive to add.  This was all just a set-up for a joke about comic book fans emulating their beloved childhood heroes.  And besides, I think Jeff Parker already summed up my feelings on the debate with this line: "This subject seems to be a rorschach for the comics industry-- you either agree that kids should have a few comics to read, or you kneejerk that someone's going to take your precious super-rape away.")
  ¶ 10:18 AM | |

  Wow, Who Would Have Guessed?
Hey, here's a surprise:  The first issue of the latest iteration of Marvel Team-Up will star Spider-Man and Wolverine.  I guess it's the furry mutant's anniversary or something, so every comic feels like they have to invite him over.
  ¶ 9:37 AM | |

  August Prognosis: Comics Overdose
Holy cow.  DCBS, like all good pushers/dealers, really knows how to work its clientele.  I try to maintain what I laughably call a comics "budget" each month, doing my best to stay within $100.  But DCBS is running so many tempting specials, I have a feeling I'm going to be casting aside all restraint this month.

For example, I was thinking I'd try out one of the new manga in DC's CMX line, but DCBS is offering all three debut titles at 65% off, so I'll probably check them all out at $3.48 apiece.  And I already knew I was going to get the Superman: Man Of Tomorrow Archives, so DCBS offering it at 45% off only sweetens the deal...and leaves me with enough money left over that I start thinking that maybe I'll check out that DC Comics Rarities Archives Vol. 1, also offered at 45% off.   Titles that I was on the fence about (such as Kurt Busiek's JLA or Ed Brubaker's Authority) start to look a lot more appealing at 50% and 75% off, respectively.  Heck, DCBS's discounts are so good that I'm even considering buying a comic written by Mark Millar.  (Well, maybe not.  On second thought, that money would probably be better spent on the Marvel Visionaries: Jack Kirby hardcover, or any of the various manga titles such as Boys Be or Hyper Rune, all at 50% off.  Just because things are a good deal doesn't mean one should abandon all taste, after all.)

Lots of other great specials at the site (including the first wave of DC/Rebellion trades, the Little Lulu reprint digest, the second Walking Dead trade, and much, much more), so check it out.  Why should I be the only one brought down by irresistible bargains?
  ¶ 6:36 PM | |