|
Post by adamwarlock2099 on May 17, 2015 10:48:36 GMT -5
Spider-Man #1 (August, 1990) by Todd McFarlane 15 years later, it's actually quite easy to make fun of this comic. What's trickier is to notice that it's actually really good. Make that 25 years later! I think that the hate that McFarlane's work on Spider-Man sometimes gets leveled at it is somewhat puzzling, given that the way he drew Spidey was, as you rightly say, very Ditko-esque. I also think that he was the first artist that improved upon the way in which Spidey's webbing was depicted, since it was initially drawn by Ditko. McFarlane's web lines looked messy and organic, and have been an influence on pretty much every artist that has worked on Spider-Man comics ever since. However, I can see that there are a number of, what I would call, "artistic idiosyncrasies" to McFarlane's work that give it a somewhat "Marmite effect" -- you're either gonna love it or hate it. In this respect, he's not a million miles from the likes of Humberto Ramos, who I personally love, but some people seem to need to pour bleach into their eyes upon seeing his Spidey artwork. I also agree that the "Torment" storyline that opened the Spider-Man title is a really good and very atmospheric tale. I've no idea how good or not the following stories in the series are because I don't own any more issues until we get to the Clone Saga period in the late '90s. I agree with this Confessor. I'd also add McFarlane, along with Liefield's art take a "hit" for their personal behavior and things done in the comic business when they were in it. Their art has their faults as does most anyone's. But just in the Spider-Man title, McFarlane's run isn't even the worst artistically or in the story. Humberto loses to me overall for a very odd reason. I do think like McFarlane and Ditko he draws an awesome Spidey but his women, very curvy and sexy have that "anime" face. They all look like 12 year old girls and that skeeves me out. I know it's weird.
|
|
|
Post by coke & comics on May 17, 2015 11:35:07 GMT -5
Make that 25 years later! I'm not a mathematician.
|
|
|
Post by coke & comics on May 17, 2015 11:35:47 GMT -5
Make that 25 years later! I think that the hate that McFarlane's work on Spider-Man sometimes gets leveled at it is somewhat puzzling, given that the way he drew Spidey was, as you rightly say, very Ditko-esque. I also think that he was the first artist that improved upon the way in which Spidey's webbing was depicted, since it was initially drawn by Ditko. McFarlane's web lines looked messy and organic, and have been an influence on pretty much every artist that has worked on Spider-Man comics ever since. However, I can see that there are a number of, what I would call, "artistic idiosyncrasies" to McFarlane's work that give it a somewhat "Marmite effect" -- you're either gonna love it or hate it. In this respect, he's not a million miles from the likes of Humberto Ramos, who I personally love, but some people seem to need to pour bleach into their eyes upon seeing his Spidey artwork. I also agree that the "Torment" storyline that opened the Spider-Man title is a really good and very atmospheric tale. I've no idea how good or not the following stories in the series are because I don't own any more issues until we get to the Clone Saga period in the late '90s. I agree with this Confessor. I'd also add McFarlane, along with Liefield's art take a "hit" for their personal behavior and things done in the comic business when they were in it. Their art has their faults as does most anyone's. But just in the Spider-Man title, McFarlane's run isn't even the worst artistically or in the story. Humberto loses to me overall for a very odd reason. I do think like McFarlane and Ditko he draws an awesome Spidey but his women, very curvy and sexy have that "anime" face. They all look like 12 year old girls and that skeeves me out. I know it's weird. I think Liefeld's art takes a hit for his art.
|
|
|
Post by Dizzy D on May 17, 2015 13:49:20 GMT -5
New Warriors #3 (September, 1990) by Fabian Nicieza, Mark Bagley, and Larry Mahlstedt Genetech employs Mad Thinker and his assistant--the shape-chaning Primus--to help them manipulate the New Warriors. From a personal standpoint, I quite appreciate a comment in the Mad Thinker's opening narration. "I am in a science facility and all I see are suits and ties." One by one, the Mad Thinker confronts the Warriors, playing his mind games. Before doing so, we get a glimpse into the lives of each Warrior. Namorita is at school, taking a break from studying to go swimming. Speedball's parents are fighting. They don't know about his secret life. Night Thrasher is visiting Silhouette, who seems to want nothing to do with him. Kid Nova (When did that Kid get added to his name?) is living with, and arguing with, his father. Firestar is cooking her dad breakfast before going out with her friends. Marvel Boy is also fighting with his parents (seems to be a theme); his father read his electronic journal and learned he's become a superhero. His father seems prejudiced against mutants. We learn it's been 3 weeks since the Warriors have interacted. Nova wonders if there's still a team. By the end of the issue, at the urging of the Mad Thinker, they agree they are a team. The series begins to take shape with this issue, which is far superior to the first two. Bagley's art is much crisper. Perhaps Mahlstedt is a better fit for him than Williamson, knowing what to accentuate to fit Bagley's style. And the glimpses we get into the home lives of the Warriors is the beginning of the strong character focus I associate with this series, and that has made many Marvel team books so great. I'm not sure why Kid Nova's costume uses a wife-beater for a top. I remember quite liking this issue. I think the "Kid" was added to Nova's name in issue #1 (as a joke by Namorita), but was out-of-story added by Marvel to avoid confusion with Galactus' then-Herald. Marvel was doing that a lot at the time and I always felt forced to me.
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on May 17, 2015 17:02:56 GMT -5
I don't think the 'Kid' for Nova lasted very long... maybe a year? year and a half? I think he dropped it when he went back to the traditional Nova costume.
|
|
|
Post by coke & comics on May 19, 2015 2:13:17 GMT -5
Deathlok #3 (September, 1990) by Dwayne McDuffie, Gregory Wright, Denys Cowan, and Rick Magyar The art change is... drastic. I think Cowan is a fine penciller, but it's very stylized compared to the very clean style Guice was using. It's like halfway through a story Neal Adams was replaced by Dave McKean. Colors credit is shared by Wright and Paul Mounts. The coloring is drastically different than previous issue. Much less texture, and also much more mood-creating via color, having entire pages be bathed in a blue or a red. This... is a different series than what we'd been reading. Too bad. It's only a 4 issue miniseries. While the art in the first two issues looked like time was spent on it, you would think some of this work could be done in advance. It's only 4 issues. Marvel has a long tradition of finding a way to get conversation without resorting to sidekicks. Spider-Man talked to himself. Captain Marvel had Rick Jones inside his head. Deathlok's human part talks to his computer part. The conversation is becoming somewhat routine. The computer analyzes a situation and decides it's hopeless unless they relax the "no killing" parameter. Deathlok does not agree to relax the parameter. And, more generally, it leads to the humor that comes from one participant in a conversation taking everything literally. "I ever tell you what a gift you have for stating the obvious?" "Four such references on file." Deathlok returns to Estrella, where once Roxxon used him as a weapon against rebels. He now aids the rebellion against Roxxon, and fights giant robot ants. He then meets Nick Fury (Nick Fury was big on cameos in the '90s) and takes the fight to Ryker. And a couple twists at the end. Still a fine issue. Just wish they'd had consist art through the miniseries.
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on May 21, 2015 21:11:28 GMT -5
So I was reading the first few New Warriors comics today, and something struck me... one of the letters basically called them a Giffen/Dematteis JLA rip off... anyone else see that? Sure, there's some banter between Nova and Nita, and Speedball is pretty juvenile, but it doesn't appriach the level of Blue and Gold, IMO.
Any thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by fanboystranger on May 21, 2015 22:25:10 GMT -5
So I was reading the first few New Warriors comics today, and something struck me... one of the letters basically called them a Giffen/Dematteis JLA rip off... anyone else see that? Sure, there's some banter between Nova and Nita, and Speedball is pretty juvenile, but it doesn't appriach the level of Blue and Gold, IMO. Any thoughts? Not even remotely is the New Warriors a JLI/JLE rip-off. People remember the humor in the Giffen/DeMatteis JL books, but they tend to miss how tightly plotted and structured Giffen made those stories. There's some sophisticated storytelling going on there, even if it is often for the sake of slapstick. New Warriors was a decent teen book, but there was nothing remarkable about what Niceiza and Bagley were doing.
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on May 21, 2015 22:42:26 GMT -5
I disagree with you there... I think they did a great job weaving alot of different threads together... the time travel/ Spinx stuff is hinted at early on... as are the seeds for Marvel Boy's big moment with his family later. Then there's Psionex and Genetech, both of which are long term plotlines. It also moved well beyond being a 'teen book' rather quickly. Unfortunately, the Marvel editors didn't realize it, and keep trying to make it be a teen book, with worse and worse results.
I think it's just so much less dark than what most of Marvel was doing in 1990, people just jump to slapstick.
|
|
|
Post by coke & comics on May 23, 2015 4:21:48 GMT -5
Ghost Rider #5 (September, 1990) by Howard Mackie, Javier Saltares, and Mark Texeira Can't have a new series without a guest appearance from Punisher or Spider-Man, preferably both. This issue goes with Punisher. We also meet a reporter--Linda Wei-interested in a story. She asks if Ghost Rider and Punisher are actually the same person. With no evidence or particular reason to believe that. The evidence she points to is that both ride motorcycles. The poor reporting on display is the most realistic part of the comic. Again, being pretty informal with these reviews, so I'm just going to echo my thoughts from the previous issues and get to the point. I recall this series fondly from my youth. I suspect that is largely due to how cool Ghost Rider looks. His cool looks are basically the only redeeming feature of the series so far. The art is good insofar as the characters are well-drawn. But in terms of arranging panels sequentially to tell a story, it's pretty poor. Mackie's scripting is no better than the visual storytelling. And the story they aren't telling well... just isn't that interesting. The "plot" for those interested is that a secret villain is giving weapons to kids in the town to stir up anarchy. Ghost Rider and Punisher track him down but decide to fight each other. The big reveal at the end is that the shadowy villain is Flag Smasher. One odd bit of continuity. Dan notes he retains Ghost Rider's memories and that Ghost Rider has never killed anyone. The rapists at the beginning of the issue lying on the stairs appear to have had their skulls smashed against the stairs, but I guess it's not absolutely clear they're dead... And for most of the series Ghost Rider is being pretty brutal and fighting with wild abandon. It's hard to imagine nobody dying in several of those fights. But there is a damn clear scene on page 6 of issue 2. (My kingdom for a scanner!) We see Ghost Rider's spiked fist raised. We see his other hand around a dude's throat. Ghost Rider smashes his spiked fist into the man's face. The face is in shadow but we see red blood around where Ghost Rider's fist is connecting. The narration reads, "Patience is not a characteristic of the Ghost Rider. Nor is mercy." Another bad guy shouts, "He did Craig!" That all really implied to me that he killed Craig, brutally, and in cold blood, as Craig was helpless. So what's up with Dan thinking Ghost Rider not killing? Is he not as aware of GR's actions as he thinks he is? Or is he lying to himself to deal with his own culpability in choosing to unleash the thing. (He chooses to unleash Ghost Rider because Ghost Rider can battle evil, there be nobody else in the vicinity of New Jersey capable of doing so.) Or, are we witnessing sloppy writing/editing? You decide! We also learn Ghost Rider's powers only work at night. "I know my rights!" "You have one right-- you don't tell me what I want to know, and you have the right to remain silent-- permanently!"
|
|
|
Post by fanboystranger on May 23, 2015 7:18:48 GMT -5
I disagree with you there... I think they did a great job weaving alot of different threads together... the time travel/ Spinx stuff is hinted at early on... as are the seeds for Marvel Boy's big moment with his family later. Then there's Psionex and Genetech, both of which are long term plotlines. It also moved well beyond being a 'teen book' rather quickly. Unfortunately, the Marvel editors didn't realize it, and keep trying to make it be a teen book, with worse and worse results. I think it's just so much less dark than what most of Marvel was doing in 1990, people just jump to slapstick. Sure, stuff is hinted at and foreshadowed, but it's not pieced together in that intricate Giffen manner. Despite the many artists, you have a pretty singular vision in JLI/JLE. It's unmistakably Giffen and Giffen's storytelling. New Warriors was a solid book, but there's nothing really to it that says, "Hey, only these creators could have done this."
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on May 23, 2015 8:26:41 GMT -5
That's true... we do call it the 'Giffen League'
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on May 23, 2015 8:29:23 GMT -5
Hey Coke, It's not a scanner, but I've found it works decently to take a picture of what you want with your phone and post that. I've done it a couple times.. it's not as good as a scan, but it's pretty close.
|
|
|
Post by coke & comics on May 23, 2015 13:34:11 GMT -5
Foolkiller #1 (October, 1990) "Mad... as in angry" by Steve Gerber, J.J. Birch and Tony Dezuniga The Foolkiller concept was introduced by Steve Gerber in the pages of Man-Thing. And revamped with Greg Salinger taking up the mantle in the pages of Gerber's Omega the Unknown. Foolkiller appeared a few other times under other writers. But here Gerber returns to his creation, opening with Salinger in a mental institution and a truly great dream sequence where he wrestles with his life. He has taken to writing. He writes to magazines and talk shows, but nobody replies. His story alternates with the story of Kurt Gerhardt, a man who loses his father... and then his job... and then his wife. Gerhardt has has enough with our society and its criminals. And Salinger is ready to go on TV to spread his message. A book at an odd place and time. In marketing and branding, it seems to fit in so smoothly with the other revamped dark and brutal heroes getting their own series around this time. But once you get past the cover and its contemporaries, it is really very different. This first issue is entirely build-up. It's a psychological drama told by a veteran writer. This isn't some assistant editor. This is Steve Gerber. Birch's art is not flashy like Lee's or McFarlane's. But it tells the story well. A story built around character, around faces, around quick cuts between parallel stories. It's really quite good. It's a great comic in a year that had no use for great comics.
|
|
|
Post by fanboystranger on May 23, 2015 16:20:30 GMT -5
Foolkiller #1 (October, 1990) "Mad... as in angry" by Steve Gerber, J.J. Birch and Tony Dezuniga The Foolkiller concept was introduced by Steve Gerber in the pages of Man-Thing. And revamped with Greg Salinger taking up the mantle in the pages of Gerber's Omega the Unknown. Foolkiller appeared a few other times under other writers. But here Gerber returns to his creation, opening with Salinger in a mental institution and a truly great dream sequence where he wrestles with his life. He has taken to writing. He writes to magazines and talk shows, but nobody replies. His story alternates with the story of Kurt Gerhardt, a man who loses his father... and then his job... and then his wife. Gerhardt has has enough with our society and its criminals. And Salinger is ready to go on TV to spread his message. A book at an odd place and time. In marketing and branding, it seems to fit in so smoothly with the other revamped dark and brutal heroes getting their own series around this time. But once you get past the cover and its contemporaries, it is really very different. This first issue is entirely build-up. It's a psychological drama told by a veteran writer. This isn't some assistant editor. This is Steve Gerber. Birch's art is not flashy like Lee's or McFarlane's. But it tells the story well. A story built around character, around faces, around quick cuts between parallel stories. It's really quite good. It's a great comic in a year that had no use for great comics. This is one of my favorite minis. It does seem kinda outta place for Marvel at the time, but it's useful to remember that Marshall Law had been a major critical and commercial success for them a few years earlier (and with its shipping delays, it ended its Epic run closer to 1990 than one might suspect). One of the things I love about the series is that it asks about the connection between heroism and perception and the media. The Foolkiller is a hero when he's hunting rape gangs in Central Park, he's a villain when he takes his war to corporations destroying the environment and people's lives. (Oddly enough, many of those arrested in the "rape gang" hunts of the late '80s would later be exonorated by new methods of interpreting evidence. Those corporate criminals mostly still get away with a slap on the wrist.)
|
|