Hello everyone. My real name is James Hurvid and I'm hoping to become a regular reviewer starting today. I've got three reviews to start with and I'm hoping to post reviews for the main Ultimate Universe on-going series in a week's time.
Grant Morrison’s New X-Men – Series Review
Back in 2000, Marvel offered long-term writer Grant Morrison a chance to take the X-Men comic book series in a bold new direction for new readers. Morrison accepted, and with the help of some sexy new uniforms (or so the back of the book tells me), New X-Men went on to win won numerous awards. The series kicked off in 2001 alongside Mark Millar’s Ultimate X-Men, who also had the brilliant idea of sexy new uniforms for new readers. But unlike Ultimate X-Men, which was part of a brand new Marvel timeline, Grant Morrison did not reset the X-Men continuity with New X-Men, so make sure you brush up on your X-Men history if you decide to pick this up (the 1990s television series is as good as anything, mind you). I read this series through the three Ultimate Collection books.
New X-Men begins with a new villain, Cassandra Nova, who I have since begun to regard as the second best X-Men villain since Magneto. Cassandra is a character almost literally from the Twilight Zone; a bald, wrinkled woman with an uncanny resemblance to Professor Xavier. Her freaky, unnatural presence is felt almost immediately in the first issue, and is intensified until her defeat at the end of the first Ultimate Collection book. Cassandra’s first act is to employ Sentinels to destroy the mutant island nation of Genosha, killing 16 million mutants and Magneto, which sets the tone for the rest of Morrison’s run.
In the world of New X-Men, the mutant population has exploded and despite the destruction of Genosha, mutants continue to dominate the news and popular culture. With Magneto dead, Xavier’s school is the leading force for mutant activity worldwide and his new X-corporation allows mutants to continue his work into adulthood. Does that sound exciting? I personally love it; it makes an excellent change from the usual “freedom fighter mutants versus oppressive humans” premise I’ve seen so many times. And some of the ideas that Morrison creates from it, like what mutant youth gangs might look like, or how disadvantaged mutants might be cared for, or what if two radically mutated beings were to have children, are nothing short of brilliance.
Characterisation is a particular strength in this series. While the recognisable characters are well handled, the series shines with the new students and teacher at Xavier’s school. Beak is the first new student to be introduced; a depressed teenager who is deformed like a bird but cannot fly. His accompaniment by the delinquent Angel makes for some engrossing conversation as their shared self-loathing come to heads with each other. And then there is Xorn, a Buddhist who has a small star for a head. His character introduces a unique philosophical perspective on the mutant concept, and he makes a good addition to the X-Men and teacher at Xavier’s school.
And I’d never thought I’d say this, but Morrison has turned Marvel’s butchering of the theory of evolution into a strength for the series. For a group that is trying to encourage real-world peaceful coexistence philosophy between humans and mutants, it was a masterstroke to have nature itself justify the eugenics movement. Beast discovers an “extinction gene” in all non-mutants, which will eventually bring about their deaths. Suddenly the world becomes a much more unsettling place, as the sympathy of mutants and humans for each other is compromised by nature itself. Mutants never think to address the superiority complex, not even the X-Men.
So after all this praise for New X-Men, it’s time to get to the fundamental problem. Morrison throws a lot of ideas onto the page but doesn’t give them any real direction. While this structure works well initially to create a feeling of chaos for the mutant world, it gets increasingly convoluted and out-of-proportion. And as a result, at least half the book is dedicated to peripheral concepts that simply aren’t as interesting as the main premise, like revisiting the alien Shi’ar and the Weapon X program. I appreciate that they had a part to play in the greater storyline, but they really weren’t interesting enough for the large number of issues dedicated to them.
And on top of that, Morrison’s use of plot-twists to drive the last Ultimate Collection book was quite frankly stupid. Good guys are regularly discovered to have been manipulated by villains, who were in turn manipulated by other villains, who were in turn manipulated by other villains, etc. It gets ridiculously convoluted and I simply gave up trying to make sense of it at the point I was taken to an apocalyptic future where the “master villain behind everything” revealed himself. The impact of this final reveal was diminished after seeing the same sort of thing just twice before.
As for the artwork, the revolving artists make it difficult to write anything in too much detail. Thankfully, the quality of work is never too inconsistent and it follows a generally high standard.
So is New X-Men worth reading? Absolutely, if your brain can contain it. The series’ strengths far outweigh its problems, and I found it a great companion to the more straightforward Ultimate X-Men.
PS: At the end of the third Ultimate Collection book, a “Morrison Manifesto” from 2000 was included, outlining Morrison’s complaints about the previous X-Men books and his plans for the series’ future prosperity. Reading this made me smile, because it closely reflected my own thoughts on a number of current comic book series. It’s an interesting read if you’re into that sort of thing.
The Sandman – Series Review
The Sandman was a fantasy comic book series penned by British author Neil Gaiman from 1989 to 1996. Having received numerous awards and critical acclaim over the course of its run, I decided to see what the fuss was all about.
The world of The Sandman is a unique one. There are seven deities called the Endless that embody and control various human concepts. These are Dream, Death, Desire, Despair, Delusion, Destruction and Destiny. Each of the Endless have their own realms and their own personalities. The titular Sandman is Dream, an almost emotionless character who controls dreams and imagination. In his realm, the Dreaming, there is a library that contains every story ever conceived, and there are a variety of inhabitants who were born from imagination, such as the Biblical characters Eve and Cain & Abel.
It’s hard to go into much detail on The Sandman’s story because the narrative is quite literally all over the place. Half the series exists as a vehicle to tell short stories, which are rarely fixed into any single place or point in time. In one issue, the story could take place in the contemporary America, the next issue might take place in Tudor England, and the next issue then might take place in a mythological realm like Hell or Asgard. There is no territory that Gaiman is not afraid to cover, and the sheer variety of content makes The Sandman completely unique in its design.
Gaiman is clearly a writer who is not afraid of research. His deep implementation of world cultures and history into his Sandman mythos makes for an engrossing read if you have any knowledge of the source material. Famous stories like A Midsummer Night’s Dream and Orpheus & Eurydice take on new meanings under Gaiman’s direction. In many cases, Gaiman creates his own imitation myths that mimic the style and structure of ancient stories. And of course one of the Endless features in every story, so there’s always something new to take away from Gaiman’s work.
Not all of The Sandman is short stories, mind you. There are several longer character stories that often delve more deeply into the Endless and the various characters they interact with. But for me, these stories actually reveal one of The Sandman’s significant flaws; the characters are mostly bland and unmemorable. In some contexts, this doesn’t really matter. Ancient myths were never about character, so Gaiman’s imitation myths don’t suffer too much. But for most of my reading, I’m constantly fighting between a deep appreciation for the concept matter and boredom with the actual dialogue and execution. Characters tend to have stilted reactions to their encounters with The Dreaming, and Gaiman’s constant use of the “I am what I am” position is a real annoyance. Whenever a character calls something about Gaiman’s mythos into question, other characters overtly dodge the question by presuming common sense, asking other questions or just giving answers so ambiguous that meaning cannot be understood. While this can be interesting on occasion (“occasion” being the key word here), I would have thought actual answers could be made far more entertaining had Gaiman made an effort to give them.
Thankfully, Gaiman did open one door to a handful of well-written character stories, in the form of Death. Dressed as a punk-goth girl, Death is the sympathetic ear and comforting arm to whomever she meets. As a “free spirit”, she’s outspoken in her love of life and a joy to see on the page. It is through Death that characters are able to express themselves completely, and overcome their personal frustrations, whatever they may be. As the best of these stories, I can happily recommend the mini-series, Death: The High Cost of Living.
Another problem with The Sandman is that while the symbolism makes for some interesting concept material, it can be very easy to get lost in Gaiman’s world. Considering that The Dreaming was made to exist without strict real-world rules, Gaiman could have made more effort to provide the reader with an understanding of what’s actually happening in the story. Because quite frankly, if I’m expending all my energy trying to make sense of the story, then I’m not emotionally responding to the story.
As for the artwork, despite a revolving cycle of artists, there’s only one word to describe it; dated. It does a decent job of conveying Gaiman’s story, but there’s absolutely nothing special about it considering the quality of work we get nowadays.
So in conclusion, The Sandman is an excellent conceptual read, and an expansive journey across time and space, fact and fiction. But the series is constantly held down by bad character design and obtuse symbolism. It’s certainly worth a read, though. The Sandman is never a wasted experience.
Fables – Vol. 1-3 Review
Had I read one less volume of Bill Willingam’s Fables, I would have said this series was one of the worst I’d read since Ultimates 3. I can think of no better example of how important first impressions are to a reader’s involvement with a new story than with Fables. Thankfully, the series does redeem itself in the third volume, and while I still don’t think Fables is to my personal taste, I can’t fault the writing for that.
The premise of Fables is that fairytale characters (the titular “Fables”) have been driven out of their storybook lands by an unnamed “adversary” and are forced into hiding in America. The human Fables live in a district of New York City (dubbed “Fabletown”), and the inhuman Fables live hidden on farmland further out. The series focuses on the human Fables, introducing us to classic characters such as Snow White, Big Bad Wolf (disguised as a human called “Bigby”), Old King Cole and Captain Bluebeard. While I have to admit that this is a fascinating concept, my initial reaction upon reading the book was that the two settings (fairytale and contemporary) clashed rather than complimented each other.
My main problem is with the characters. Willingham’s idea was that with a contemporary setting, the Fables should have contemporary personalities and lifestyles, and so everyone has been re-characterised. For example, Snow White is now a government official responsible for running Fabletown and Prince Charming is now a womaniser who takes money from the women he sleeps with. I can see why some people would find these changes fascinating, but it just disconnects me from the concept. With faces that only look in passing like the fairytales they represent, dressed and speaking in a fashion that doesn’t relate to who these characters used to be, I simply fail to believe that these characters are the fairytales they say they are. With that said, how well do these characters stand on their own merits? Well, without development, they come across as little more than one-note stock characters. There’s an art to making simplistic characters interesting and Willingham clearly just didn’t have it. But even with development, there are only a few characters that I would call compelling. I feel there’s a lot to be desired from Fables’ characters in general.
In the first volume of Fables, Willingham uses a “whodunit” murder mystery (which turned out to be a hoax, surprise surprise) as an excuse to meet all the characters, but this was horribly executed. Not only did it not do a good job of introducing the characters, but the entire thing made no sense whatsoever. For example, Bigby manages to acquire cartloads of blood and has some other characters re-create the “murder scene” to see if a human body could contain that much blood. I’m not joking; this piece of complete stupidity actually happened in the book, and with Bigby already having worked out at this point that the scene was faked. And then at the end of that story, Willingham forces a party of people to gather round to hear the big reveal Poirot-style, despite that nearly everyone at the party had nothing to do with the case. Then Willingham has Bigby justify the gathering by spending a page telling Snow White how he always wanted to do it, and she didn’t think to correct him on how dumb the idea actually was. In short, the first volume is moronic in every sense of the word.
The second volume introduces us to the non-human Fables at the farm, and as such was a much better demonstration of the unique concept of Fables than the first volume. The story pays homage to the novel “Animal Farm”, in which the non-human Fables violently revolt against their forced seclusion. It was much more logical than the first volume (and overall much better), yet I feel that the violence of it was excessive, as if it were just for the sake of being dark. This book also continues and emphasises another problem with the first volume; expositional writing. There is very little dialogue here (until toward the end of the book) that felt natural or believable. Instead, it felt like the characters were just relaying plot points to the reader, and undermined what was going on in the story. Thankfully, Volume Three has neither of the above two volumes’ faults. Combining two separate stories, one of which sees romance bloom between the characters, Bigby Wolf and Snow White, the book is not only much more engrossing but much better written to boot. We see a more dynamic interaction between the human and non-human Fables for one thing, which does a lot to make the world of Fables an engrossing place to see. The idea of tiny policemen riding talking mice as spies was a particularly novel idea. It feels like this book is where Fables should have started, and I’m honestly tempted to say skip the first two volumes (Wikipedia explains it all anyway).
So overall, if you have an interest in fairytales and a lot of patience, you could find Fables a rewarding experience. But otherwise, it’s hard to really recommend Fables in place of other comic book series. While the story is good, I didn’t feel that it had the passion or flare that has made other series so memorable.
Last edited by Raien on Mon May 25, 2009 11:11 pm; edited 1 time in total
Welcome James to the forum and to the wacky world of Whatever of which you are familiar with due to being a regular visitor to the shop.
I asked James to maybe do some reviews for us while talking in the shop, i noted his opinions on certain titles while we were talking and also noted a high level of intelligence and articulation while putting points across,
ever thought of doing reviews i asked, i think you may be quite good at it if you were to try it, and asked if he would do some random scribbling for us, when and if he had time that is.
well here we have his first outing, blunt and brutal at times, but honest and as Sharp as a razor, i had a feeling that he wouldn't be afraid to be controversial in his writings and like myself and my opinion of Kick Ass James rips into Fables.
I hope that this is the beginning of a new era of reader reviews for the forum and would like to extend my gratitude and thanks for the effort and the time committed to these reviews.
Liked the X-Men review And agree with the slightly weird angle that Morrison took the series as he progressed, I wasn't that keen on the jump into the future with the Phoenix egg and evil Beast thing. Couldn't see the point myself. _________________ Pro Massacre Boy!
Thanks for the replies. I did some review browsing for Fables and I've noticed that every single positive opinion sounds more-or-less exactly the same.
"I loved the original fairy tales as a child, and I hate Disney."
Looks like Fables is yet another example of what Batmanuel refers to as "filling the void". Part of me feels vindicated, but another part of me wonders if, consider the characters are available to the public domain, whether another writer could do their own take on the concept and make it, you know, good.
I can't belive you hate Fables that much.
Its actually a put on, isn't it? Like, seriously, you're pulling our legs. _________________ Let There Be Lightning
I can't belive you hate Fables that much.
Its actually a put on, isn't it? Like, seriously, you're pulling our legs.
The reason why I'm particularly adverse to Fables is the praise. As someone who would like to be a writer, unanimous praise for something so atrocious royally fucks me up. I can't look at the phrase "Eisner award-winning" without thinking about how they actually considered Fables an example of good writing.
I'm not going to argue the fact that the Ultimates 3 and Ultimatum is badly written. Its awful, a jarring juxtaposition from the Ultimates, changed dialoge and character motivation.
But there is no way, and I mean NO WAY, that anyone can honestly say that Fables is that bad. Jack of Fables, maybe, but thats just because its a differnt tone of book, lighthearted and jovial, against Fables serious note.
(I just read your review of Sandman. Bad character design? I'm sorry, but you're clearly a madman.) _________________ Let There Be Lightning
But there is no way, and I mean NO WAY, that anyone can honestly say that Fables is that bad. Jack of Fables, maybe, but thats just because its a differnt tone of book, lighthearted and jovial, against Fables serious note.
I did a double-take here. You're saying that Jack of Fables is as bad as Ultimates 3, and that Fables is not as bad because it has a serious tone? Why does the book's tone matter so much to quality, and not good writing and characterisation? Your position is exactly the sort of thing I've been reading in all the other Fables reviews (often followed by the "I hate Disney" line).
Quote:
(I just read your review of Sandman. Bad character design? I'm sorry, but you're clearly a madman.)
"Bad" was probably the wrong word to use in the conclusion; the characters simply weren't the focus of The Sandman's stories, and unfortunately for the review, well-developed characters are essential to my personal enjoyment of literature. If I had to choose between a Death story and the award-winning Midsummer Night's Dream issue, I would choose the Death story.
First of all, please don't write a review without being fully informed. Read the entire collections, then form an opinion. Its only fair.
I'm not sure what you were expecting, when you say an Intelligent Deconstruction of certain concepts. Fables was intended to, and has for 80+ issues now, tell a story.
Without reading more than 12 issues, you're missing out on massive character arc developments, and very important plot developments.
Bigby (Big-B. Big B.ad. How do you not get that?) grows past his town Sherrif role, itself is explained as to why they need their own personal one. More of Cinderella is explained, and she grows WAY past angsty, Beauty is not just a bitch, and as for "New Character" Rose Red? Honestly?
I don't want to give much away, but needless to say, the way the characters have grown in the past 7 years is phenominal. Almost everyone has been developed, Cindy, Flycatcher, Boy Blue, Red Riding Hood. If it could be said their was a "main character" in this ensemble cast, it would have to be Bigby and Snow, and their relationship has gone in such unique directions, in a similar way as Goldilocks did.
And Terrorist? Really? Political Activist! (I'll come back to that)
I really don't think that you can comment on Willinghams personal attitudes after reading 13 issues of something.
The first volume was a fun little jaunt into this world, establishing cartain facts. The Adverseary, (a 75 issue Arc which just recently concluded), chacarcters, roles and ideas. Don't forget that if a book doesn't sell, then it will be Axed (RIP Tech Jacket), and to avoid this you must write a self contained, entertaining arc, which can lead way into longer plotlines.
As for the first Arc, the Murder of Rose Red. Yes, Bigby sussed that Jack was running a scam at the offset, but the reader hasn't. It's needed to establish that Jack is a con-artist by Nature, so while it maybe obvious there is a scheme, its not clear what that is. So continuing a line of questoning was needed to establish what the scheme was, while in turn introducing the readers to a handful of characters, and subsequently their motivations.
Saying the party was forced is also a moot argument, its needed to show that all these characters are from a same shared experience, being Exiles. To say that this community of a number of hundreds would be unaware that a murder had taken place is rediculous.
How is it fair to say that a characters motivations for doing something, no matter how obscure is "Dumb". Its reasonable, and fairly sweet I thought, adding a human element to a character who is simply not-Human.
The second volume introduces the Farm, being an important local in itself, 1 of 2 places frequented in the first 50 issues by most of the cast. The idea was that it was a take on Animal Farm, a homage not being akin to a Rip-Off.
The book in itself has won awards due to the leght and depth of the series, which you have not read, and are thus forming an Opinion of something that you haven't read, the character and plot developments.
As for your Opinion, I know that everyone is entitled to their own, however no ammount of arguing that the Sky is Green becasue it is your opinion will ever make it so.
Fables is worth 100 New X-Men, and I think tomorrow I shall re-read the entire thing. _________________ Let There Be Lightning
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
