Forever Annoying

So, this was the second week of the villains month at DC called "Forever Evil."
As far as I can tell, so far it's Forever Boring.

 Last week's "Forever Evil #1" by Johns and Finch was ok. It was pretty to look at, and the Dick Grayson reveal was interesting, but it was otherwise predictable, if not ridiculous, with Ultraman pushing the moon in front of the sun, and Luthor kneeling wondering where is Superman to save him. Cute, having Lex get religion when the chips are down. Never saw THAT before. (Note to self: Sarcasm looks like everything else in type)

I confess, I did not read everyone of the tie-ins. I am not millionaire Bruce Wayne, or even Hundredaire Phil McKlosky. And the gaul of DC comics to make 3D covers?! REALLY?! Did I fall asleep and someone turned the clock back to 1985? If so, call my stock broker! I have some investments to make. But, seriously, you want us to buy these freakin' things, then you jack the price up a buck for a dumb gimmick? So I grabbed a few non-3D books that I would have read anyway.

Last week I read:
Cyborg Superman #1 Ridiculous and convoluted story and the art looked rushed.

Count Vertigo #1, on the other hand, actually worked. Even the 3D cover made sense, since they all made me dizzy and gave me a headache. The story was a nice background piece on the Count and really fleshed out his character, and the art was consistent with the current team of Lemire and Sorrentino providing both. I've been pleased with the current situation at Green Arrow since #17 when Lemire and Sorrentino took over, doing their best to wipe away the horrible taste left in our mouths from the first 16 issues of GA in the New 52.

This week so far I've read:
Lobo #1... uh... what the actual fuck is going on here? As redesigns go, this one is incomprehensible.
What was wrong with Lobo? He was a great character just the way he was. Over the top violent and equal parts comedy and sci-fi. Now he looks like he was redesigned for a Twilight movie franchise. Stupid.

Black Manta #1 Not great. Overall unnecessary story about Black Manta's POV when the Crime Syndicate gathers the criminals in "Forever Evil." The only important part of the story is that when Ultraman moves the moon in front of the sun he causes a massive tidal disruption that wipes out part of Massachusetts. The part where Black Manta's dad is buried. So now, his anger is aimed at Ultraman instead of Aquaman.  Meh.

Honestly, if the big comics companies want to engage us in these multi-faceted crossover events, they really should be more concerned with creating well written stories instead of stupid gimmick cover treatments. These books cost a lot of money for a 10-15 minute read. They need to remember that, in this economy, 'disposable income' does NOT exist, and the only thing disposable here is their product.

As for Marvel, their big event is "Infinity." Ok, so Thanos, the mad Titan, the avatar of death, the purple guy at the end of the Avengers movie that non-comics fans thought was Hellboy, is once again after the infinity gems/infinity gauntlet. Again I am left wondering if I missed out on some time-travel experiment. But, I will say that this event is far more contained then the DC event. Sure, there are a bunch of crossover mini-series, but you can easily avoid them and get the main story from three book: Infinity, Avengers and New Avengers.
The story is big and a bit unwieldy, but it's got a nice, classic cosmic Marvel feel, and plenty of over-the-top Alien/God characters to make it entertaining.

The books I'm actually interested in these days are "Kings Watch," "Superior Spider-Man," and "Batman '66."

Kings Watch #1 by Parker and Laming is a nice update of the "Defenders of the Earth" team of The Phantom, Flash Gordon and Mandrake the Magician. If my Dad were here, this is a book I'd have to share with him, and I would do it gladly. It's well written, the artwork is beautiful and it's got some good solid classic characters that are treated well in an update. Highly recommended.

Batman '66 #1-2 So far this book has been great. The story, also by Jeff Parker, is quirky and campy, the characters retain their 1966 voices, and the artwork is perfect. The first issue art by Jonathan Case is trippy and wacky, and the second issue, by the amazing Ty Templeton is, well, amazing! Also highly recommended.

Superior Spider-man #17 Dan Slott has taken a LOT of shit for what he's done to Spider-man/Peter Parker, and I am among those who gave it to him. Now, I am intrigued by this book and the odd turns it takes, especially the latest turn where a time vortex brings the Spider-Man from 2099 to 2013. I will say, I am compelled to read each issue... BUT ... I am only doing so, hoping that Peter returns SOON. I mean, Ock is really destroying his life! Spider Island? Minions? What the hell more can he do? I probably shouldn't ask. This I can only recommend to fans that know and love Spider-man, and if that's you, you are probably already reading this.

Ok, enough. Let me know what you're reading.
Thanks,
-Rickman

Look! Up in the sky! It's a bird! It's a plane! It's... some guy I barely recognize?

Hey there!
See? I told you I'd post again soon!

Well, this here post is about Superman. Yep. I got opinions just like everyone else.

So, I went to see "Man of Steel" yesterday.

And, while it's a perfectly fine movie about a super powered man saving the Earth from an alien invasion, it's not Superman. At least not the one I know. Not the one that has been published in comics for the last 75 years. And not really even resembling any of the other media depictions of the character either. So, while this certainly isn't your father's Superman, it's no Superman we've ever seen before. Sadly.

These days it's all about the re-boot. Change it all up. Make it new and different. Dark and edgy. Push the envelope. Well, bravo. You pushed it so far it fell off the desk and turned into something almost unrecognizable.

I am going to start discussing points of the movie now. So if you haven't seen it, and you don't want it spoiled, now's your chance to leave.

Ok. I can nitpick. I hated the costume from the minute it leaked. I despise the fact that Warner Bros.  made DC comics let Hollywood dictate the New 52 look for Superman as well. And why discard the spit-curl in his hair?

But that's all superficial. My real problem is with Superman's character... or lack thereof. Who the hell is he? We never really find out. This movie is too busy blowing crap up and destroying both Smallville and Metropolis to care about character development. Ok, we see Clark, or whoever he's pretending to be, save about a dozen guys from an oil rig that is in the process of exploding. (Who does Zack Snyder think he is? Michael Bay?) That's, I guess, enough to let us know that he has great powers and will sacrifice himself for the safety of others. Sure he does a few things like this through his childhood, too, but all we see him do is whine about it. You'd think with Kevin Costner AND Russel Crowe as Dads, he'd have a little more character.

But that's the problem. We never actually meet Clark. He never gets a chance to BE Clark. It's been said, I'm sorry I can't remember who said it, that with Batman, Bruce Wayne is the mask, but with Superman, Clark Kent puts on the suit to help people, but he takes it off to live his life. Superman is his mask.

That's not the only thing that bothered me. I'm going on about character here, and Superman's character is one of great moral fiber. In 75 years Superman has killed once in the comics and once on film. In John Byrne's run, after his "Man of Steel" reboot, Superman was "forced" to kill Zod and crew with kryptonite. After which, because of his grief, he went on a self-imposed exile into space.
In the movie "Superman II," he saps the powers of Zod and crew and they fall into an abyss. We assume they died. In this new movie Superman apparently feels there is no other way to deal with General Zod, so he snaps his neck.

When I saw this I had to stop myself from getting up and walking out of the theater. I have done that only once before. Halfway through "Batman and Robin." I'm sure you can't blame me for that.

This scene really offended me. Here are a few reasons why:

As a rule, Superman does not kill.
This is a character created to be the best possible version of a man. A man that does everything he possibly can to help. Like a doctor, his first rule is 'do no harm.' Even before Stan Lee gave us Peter Parker's mantra: "With great power comes great responsibility," Superman was there, living this creed. Superman is supposed to be what we aspire to. We can't be him. Ever. But we want to. and that is what drives us. If he becomes no better than we are, then where are we? If we can't have fictional characters that have a greater moral standing, what the hell have we become?

Superman does not kill.
If you are a writer, and you feel the need to "update" or fundamentally change a character... especially a character that is an icon... excuse me.. THE icon... then you should do one of two things: create a new character, or stop writing all together... it's not your thing.
The fact that almost every character in mainstream comics has undergone a radical change recently is a sign of laziness in the writers. Not to mention the fact that quite a bit of the crap coming out these days is barely more than "fan fiction." You don't need to kill your character to make it interesting. You don't need to radically change the fundamental nature of a character to draw an audience. You need to write a good story. If you can't do that, find a new job.

SUPERMAN DOES NOT KILL.

And he's not supposed to be so shiny.

Full disclosure: Scott vehemently disagrees with me on this. He loved the movie, loved the scene, and thinks this is among his favorite superhero movies. Everyone's entitled to their opinion.
What's your's?

-Rickman

Hey Folks!
Yeah, I know, it's been a while. Sorry.

SO! Comics! I wanted to talk a little about a comic that I am really excited about, "The Wake," by Scott Snyder and Sean Murphy. Snyder has been pumping out some interesting work recently, i.e.: "Batman: Year Zero" and "Superman: Unchained," but "The Wake" has me really psyched.

As some of my friends know, I am a BIG fan of The Creature from the Black Lagoon. I created a comic character many years ago, "Fishman," that you may have seen if you've been in the store in the last few years, and I have an extensive collection of Creature memorabilia. This book almost made my head explode. First off, I absolutely love Sean Murphy's artwork. I was introduced to him with "Joe the Barbarian," written by Grant Morrison, and then with "Punk Rock Jesus," (and if anyone knows where I can procure a copy of issue #2, I'd really appreciate it!) where not only his artwork AND writing, but the packaging was awesome. "Punk Rock Jesus" was printed in black and white on the pulpy news print we used to see during the indy boom of the 80's. The texture of the artwork and the paper gave that book an incredible, nostalgic feel, and the story gave you a punch in the gut, like the best of the books from the 80's. All around an amazing read. I highly recommend it.

In "The Wake," Snyder and Murphy are treating us to a sea creature story that, from the very first page, draws you in with a fine tuned, cinematic flair. We are introduced to the main character, Dr. Lee Archer, who seems to be in some far-flung future where there has apparently been an apocalypse of some type, and the city is practically under water. We are then brought back to the present, where Dr. Archer meets Agent Astor Cruz, who looks like Jean Reno from "The Professional." I can't help reading that character in "Leon's" voice. The story continues to include a few more characters, it dives deeper into the intrigue and has an awesome reveal at the end. Go find the first issue NOW! It will be gone soon and you will kick yourself for missing this.

I'll be back soon (no, really... I MEAN it...) with more. In the meantime, what have you been reading? Tell me about it in the comments or on our Facebook page.

Thanks for reading,
-Rickman

So... What's New?

Well, it's Monday and we just posted the list of new comics coming out this Wednesday. DC Comics continues to roll out their NEW New 52 titles... which makes it more than 52 now, I think... And they have given us a new BATMAN INC. #1. Personally I didn't love the last version, which lasted less than a year before the re-vamp, but hey, another BATMAN title! How could that possibly be bad? (I really wish there was a 'sarcasm' font).

I have a very sad and almost a feeling of mourning when I read DC Comics now. The Justice League is... interesting. My favorite part, these days, being the SHAZAM back-up story. BATMAN is relatively unchanged. It's nice to see Barbara Gordon in the BATGIRL costume again, even if it makes no real sense. But my strongest feelings are that I absolutely ABHOR what has been done to GREEN ARROW... they've basically turned him into HAWKEYE from Marvel Comics, a character that was basically a rip-off of GREEN ARROW to begin with... and I, strangely, LOVE what's going on with AQUAMAN. If anything positive is to be said about the New 52, it's that AQUAMAN has become an amazingly well written character... FINALLY! I used to enjoy many DC titles. Now, not so much. I regularly collected BATMAN, SUPERMAN, GREEN ARROW, ZATANNA, SUPERGIRL, SUPERBOY, TEEN TITANS and more. Now I pick up very few. And I really miss the ones that are lost. What are your thoughts on the New 52? Are you reading as much? More? Less? Favorites?

Sticking with DC Comics for the moment, how are you all feeling about this BEFORE WATCHMEN thing? This week sees the release of the promo newspaper THE NEW FRONTIERSMAN, that, if you can't get an actual copy from the shop, you can see online at http://www.thenewfrontiersman.net/ At first I was a bit unsettled about this. I thought, why do we need to see more of THE WATCHMEN? The original GN was perfect. We got the story and the backstory and everything else we needed in the GN. The movie was, arguably, as perfect as it could be, so why... other than greed... would we need more? But then I saw what was being produced, and the talent producing it. Some of the creators alone are intriguing me enough to pick up these books. Cooke, Azzarello, Jones, Conner, Straczynski, Andy AND Joe Kubert!! Gotta at least check it out. Maybe they have something here. What do you think? Are you interested in any or all of these books?

AMAZING SPIDER-MAN is going strong with the current storyline "Ends of the Earth." It seems Doc Ock has reached the end of his life and he intends to take the entire human race with him. He's enlisted not only the Sinister Six in his plan, but convinces the leaders of the world that he is trying to save the planet. Only Spider-man is unconvinced, and he's only got the Black Widow and Silver Sable to help him defeat Ock while the world's governments and S.H.I.E.L.D. are fighting to stop them. Slott, Castelli and Martin are doing an excellent job with this story. And they didn't have to kill the main character or reboot an entire universe to do it! Just very well written and drawn comics! Imagine that! (REALLY need that 'sarcasm' font!)

So, what are you reading? What comics do you enjoy? Are disappointed in? Let us know! Maybe, together, we make comics better!

-The Artist Currently Known As RICKMAN

Equality? There is no equality... ANYWHERE.

Okay. So, apparently, there's more to say about this topic. And here I am saying it. Continuing a debate from another blog, found here --- http://goodcomics.comicbookresources.com/2012/02/21/she-has-no-head-no-its-not-equal/
I originally responded with yesterday's blog below.

Well, as usual, other commenters got way off topic and I felt the need to reign it in.

The stated problem was the lack of gender equality in comics. But the real problem isn't comics, it's everything. There is no equality anywhere. For any group.

I am a man. I work primarily as a freelance artist/graphic designer. I am in my home office most of my day. I don't like to work in silence, so I generally have the television on. I have noticed that daytime TV from about 8am until after 3pm is aimed at women. All the morning news magazines and the later female gabfests are all aimed at women and women's issues. Why? Because, historically, women have been the people who were home at these times watching TV while caring for their children and tending to their homes. Now, please don't take this as a chauvinistic statement. It is not my desire to keep women barefoot and pregnant. Nor do I want to get paid more than a woman for the same job. I am just stating fact. Daytime TV; newsmags, talkshows, soap operas and even the courtroom judge shows are all aimed at women. Giving that demographic what the media perceives it wants.

Why does the media perceive this? How does the media arrive at it's conclusion? Money. Pure and simple. The media knows what sells and then gives it to us in abundance. Don't fool yourself into thinking that there's some other moral reason for any of this. It all boils down to money. Comics, movies, TV, even podcasts and online media is all designed to separate you from your cash. And if they need to talk about reproductive health on a morning show or show an abundance of cleavage in a comic book, they are going to do it. Because the demographic that the product is aimed at will pay.

Also, I'd like to comment on what is being discussed here. The complaints being leveled are against drawings of women. Not even photographs of real women. We are engaging in a discussion about ink on paper. I'm sure there are many people reading this who will pound their fists and scream that it makes no difference, that this is degrading either way, but think for a moment. A drawing is an artistic interpretation. Everyone's interpretation of art is different. Some folks complain about the photographic work of Maplethorpe. Is it pornography or art? That's up to the viewer. All that is happening here is a company or corporation is adjusting it's aesthetic towards it's preferred demographic. The same way the Twilight movie saga is aimed at lovesick teenaged girls. Yet that argument is considered comedy.

And look at what has happened in the past. Let's take the history of the very popular and lucrative property of Wonder Woman for example. Recently, DC Comics decided to revamp the character. She became younger and her trademark one-piece bathing suit costume was replace by a bodice and pants. This causes an uproar, not just in the comics community, but in the news media as well. And what happened? She got her bathing suit back. Similarly, back in the late 1960's-early 1970's, the powers that be at DC decided not only that they would give WW a new, far less revealing costume, but made her a very powerful, non-super hero. She was fighting crime without superpowers, just knowledge and skill. And who but Gloria Steinem came out in protest of this. Her feeling was that she had been demoted from a powerful woman, comfortable in her sexuality, to a regular person. Recently, Steinem had similar complaints about the pants, stating: "I don't have a big issue with jeans versus skirt -- though jeans give us the idea that only pants can be powerful -- tell that to Greek warriors and sumo wrestlers -- and though in fact, they're so tight that they've just painted her legs blue; hardly a cover-up. I have an issue with changing her clothes and destroying home and family on what seems to be the brainstorming of a very limited group of brains."

Here's another point. Take a look at any illustration of Superman. WHat are you actually looking at? You are looking at a drawing of a naked man sans genitals. The only reason we see him as "clothed" is that there are colors other than flesh on the areas where he would have skin. Color Superman in a beige-peach color and you have a naked man.
And, seriously, all the new lines added to the costumes these days amount to just that… more lines.

I agree that the depiction of women in comics is fantasized. But so is the depiction of men. I will never live up to the ideal of a muscle-bound super man. Almost no one will. And if a woman is drawn with incredibly large breasts twisting in a way that her bottom and her chest are both facing the viewer, well, then that's just bad art. Plain and simple. If you want your women drawn realistically, or not overly fantasized, I suggest the work of Terry Moore or Jeff Smith or Mike Mignola or any number of creators whose work is created for a slightly different demographic.

Once again, this is adolescent male fantasy. If it was adolescent female fantasy, we'd be discussing The Twilight Saga. There is a reason it looks and acts the way it does. It was designed that way.

Now, you can complain all you want… and you should. Every civilization that has prospered on this planet has done so because they fought for what they wanted. So, please don't stop fighting. But do it right. Create your own work. Don't whine that things aren't right the way they are. Don't hide behind a keyboard or a sign. DO SOMETHING.

Ok. Go ahead and pick this apart and let's argue some more about something that doesn't care what we think about it and will remain the same either way.

-Rickman

Oh, my! Isn't it AWFUL how women are portrayed in comics?! No. No it isn't.

Wow. I just read yet another rant on how women are objectified by comics.
Same thing we read 3 minutes ago. And frankly, like the last 300 blogs, vlogs, columns and whatnot on this subject, it simply doesn't, and will never matter. Because comics are, and always have been considered "ADOLESCENT MALE FANTASY."

Go back and read that again. Slowly.

Sorry, but it's true. The demographic for comic books and video games and such has always been the adolescent male, whether that's an actual 14yr old boy or a 34yr old man in a state of arrested development, that is the demo.

Similarly we see the same thing in TV and movies and other media. It's just the way it is. The ideal man is a musclebound, 6'2" adonis, and the ideal woman is a cross between Marilyn Monroe and Megan Fox.

And, of course, they are going to be put in the most revealing costumes and most compromising poses. ANd they are going to be as beautifully drawn as the artist can draw. It's supposed to be FANTASY. If you want reality, go outside. Read historical non-fiction. It's a COMIC BOOK for heaven's sake!!!

I understand that you, and everyone else (including myself) would like to see yourself in comics and on TV, but really, no one wants to see a fat guy or an ugly girl in spandex and a cape. I really don't believe that they'll ever re-cast GLEE with a bunch of ugly fat kids. And Robert Downey Jr. is never going to be in an IRON MAN movie with some 38yr old frumpy housewife as his romantic interest.

I'm sorry, but that's just the way it is. So if you feel you're being left out, you have a few options. Stop reading the mainstream comics if they offend you that much, and find some indy comics that play to your sensibilities. Or try manga. Everyone looks the same in manga. Also you can change the channel or not go to that particular movie. This will send your message by not giving the corporations your dollar. You also can take it upon yourself to create your own comics or other media the way you feel it should be done.

But please stop whining. Be the intelligent person that you are and realize that no matter how much you shake your fist at the sky, it will never the exact shade of blue you want it to be.

My 52 cents...

Hey Folks,

I am OBVIOUSLY not a regular blogger. Honestly I don't really believe anyone cares what I think, mainly because I really don't care what anyone else thinks, so I tend to not spout off on a regular basis like the rest of the incredibly narcissistic blog-O-sphere.

That said, I am now going to put in my 2¢, or rather 299¢... or 399¢ as the case may be, on DC Comics' "New 52". A little late, but whatever...

First of all, I have NOT read ALL of the 52 initial releases. I simply don't care about all of them, and I really don't have the money to buy crap.
So...
JUSTICE LEAGUE #s 1 & 2 - Big, overblown action sequence after big, overblown action sequence. Beautiful, if not the "same" artwork we always get from Jim Lee. I understand, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it," but maybe, just maybe Jim Lee could try something a bit different at some point. You know how you can look at a comic from the 80's or 90's and say "that's 90's book'... ? Well, Jim's art, while absolutely beautiful, is getting dated. Change it up. Move on.
As for the writing... well, there's really not much to go on. Not sure what Geoff Johns is getting paid, but I hope it's not hourly. He couldn't have spent more than five or ten minutes on either issue. Sure it's fun, kind of like a Michael Bay movie, but devoid of substance (kind of like a Michael Bay movie)... and text. Consisting of a bunch of large panels with two or less word balloons per (and especially the wordless 2-page spread in #2), these books are an incredibly quick read. And for $3.99 I would really like to spend more time in my comic. Sure I can stare at the pretty pictures, but that still doesn't give it substance. I think this one would be better read, for substance and financial reasons, in trade paperback.

DETECTIVE COMICS #s 1 & 2 - Another pretty book, but with a bit more substance. This one I really enjoyed, until I realized why. I realized I was looking at Tony Daniel's version of Frank Miller's Dark Knight Returns. Panel after panel, it seems that Daniel is lifting images from DKR. Hey, why not? We all loved DKR. Why not re-live the experience? Did he think we wouldn't notice? Really? If you're gonna rip something off, try not to make it the most popular thing in the genre.
The story, also by Mr. Daniel, is intriguing, though, especially the ending of issue #1, which is conveniently, yet not surprisingly unresolved in issue #2. This one I will try for a few more issues.

BATMAN: DARK KNIGHT #1 - Again, very pretty, but this is a story that I feel I've read before. I love David Finch's art. It is a very gritty, if not overly line-heavy, style befitting the Dark Knight. I haven't gotten to #2 yet, but I will. I was compelled enough for two issues. We'll see how much more, though.

BATGIRL #1 - This was an interesting concept from the outset. How were they going to explain Barbra Gordon being able to walk again? Well, they really didn't. Basically, like the old man in Monty Python and The Holy Grail (Look it up! You damn kids and your rock-n-rap...), she "got better." Apparently, she was crippled for three years and had surgery so now she's not only "all better," but she can swing from a rope and kick criminal ass. Wish the real world worked that way. It hurts for me just to get out of bed in the morning. Anyway, the art is very nice and the story is... interesting. The characterization of Barbra seems a bit off, but I will go another issue or two on this. Hopefully, it'll gain momentum.

BATMAN #1 - Honestly, it felt like a regular Batman book. Nice art, fairly interesting, if not compelling, story... your basic Batman. Nothing really to report here. If you like the recent comic version of Batman, you'll like this.

BATMAN AND ROBIN #1 - Boring. I don't care about Damian, I didn't like the art, I'm not buying any more of it.

As for:
BATWING, BATWOMAN, CATWOMAN, BIRDS OF PREY and RED HOOD...
I couldn't care less and didn't waste my money on them.

This also goes for all of the LANTERN books, GREEN, RED, CORPS and GUARDIANS.
I liked the movie (I really don't see what all the complaining was about. You're going into a movie about a guy that can create anything he can think of with his glowing green ring. What the hell do you want?), I just don't care about the tangled back story of the books.

JUSTICE LEAGUE INTERNATIONAL #1 - I actually liked this one. It had a few "wait, what?" moments for me, but it was fun and well drawn. I'm giving it another issue or two before I bail.

WONDER WOMAN #1 - I kinda liked this one as well. The story was interesting, and I have been a fan of Cliff Chiang's art for a while. I loved his Green Arrow work. Also, I really like the new logo. It was designed by a former student of mine from when I taught at the Joe Kubert School, Jared Fletcher. Check out his other comics and logo work at Stranger Fictions.

AQUAMAN #1 - Oddly, this one I REALLY liked! The art (if you can't tell, the art is a big sell for me) by Ivan Reis and Joe Prado is wonderful. (I never liked that stupid lantern symbol that he drew coming off of Green Lantern's chest, but that may have been an editorial decision. Like the ridiculous red and blue blur coming off of Superman's cape in the late 90's early 2k's that was thought up by that moron Eddie Berganza, DC's little Napoleon. Dick.) Where was I... Oh yeah..
The art was great and the story was wonderful. I really like how they addressed the public's opinion of Aquaman. I have to admit, I have even written a song about Aquaman that isn't very flattering. But this book had some real out-loud laughs in it, and was compelling. This one I will continue to buy.

ANIMAL MAN #1 - A lot of people were crazy about this book. I enjoyed it, and it had a really creepy twist(ed) ending, but I won't say I was crazy about it. The artwork by Travel Foreman was kind of odd and, I would think off-putting, for regular comic buyers, but I'm interested in #2.

ACTION COMICS #1 - So, apparently in the "new" DC Universe, Superman is a dick. I guess that means, to be more relevant and appeal to today's comic book audience, the hero has to be a dick. Interesting. I got a chance to watch the Captain Marvel serials from the 40's recently, and he was kind of a dick, too. He has no problem gunning down "natives" from India, or pitching gangsters off buildings to their deaths. I suppose they deserved it, they were trying to kill him. I just hope there's a point in this new Action story that Superman realizes what it means to be a hero and begins to value human life. It's interesting enough, and the art is nice, but at $3.99 I'm not giving it long to get better.

SUPERMAN #1 - Lois is dating a new guy who seems to be a douche. Lois herself is kind of a bitch. And Clark seems a bit clueless. And, I'm sorry, but if it took this long to get rid of the underwear on the outside, why bother? I just looks wrong, now. I understand some Hollywood douche-bag decided that Superman's costume needed to change for the movie, but why can the Time-Warner folks never say "NO." Seriously. We had to go through an entire decade plus of horrifying Batman movies before we were blessed with Chris Nolan. Where's the integrity? And then to parley that stupidity into the comics? Wow. Just wow. The art is nice, but the characterizations are off. I'm still buying this one, but it's close to the chopping block.

SUPERBOY #1 - Interesting take. The last Superboy and the new one have a lot in common. I actually like the new one's back story better than the old one. It's got a bit more intrigue. We know he has Kryptonian DNA, but we're not sure of the human part. The costume is interesting as well. I'll stay on this one for a few issues to see where it goes.

SUPERGIRL #1 - Another interesting take. Similar to the last version, but with a few tweaks. What's difficult is that we don't really know who Superman is yet, so we can't really judge if he's going to do right by Supergirl or not. So far, Supes has been a dick in his recent appearances. Going to wait and see. I'll give it one or two more.

JUSTICE LEAGUE DARK #1 - Weird concept. I like most of the characters, especially Zatanna, so I'm giving this a try. So far, not bad. I don't really like the Eighties Goth look on Zatanna, but I'm interested enough for a few issues.

GREEN ARROW #s 1 & 2 - I F'ING HATE THIS BOOK!!!!! Am I clear? This is the WORST take on Ollie EVER! I am, and have been a Green Arrow fan for a long time, so this comes from a very subjective place. The fact that they erased the old GA and completely reworked him into the "Smallville" TV show version is an outrage. I really didn't mind the TV show. It was cool seeing different takes on old characters made specifically for TV. But THIS? No. They have turned Ollie into a douchier version of Tony Stark with a scooby-crew. What the hell is the difference between this guy and Bruce Wayne? The colors? The bow? This was far more than a costume tweak. This was a rape. A complete destruction of everything that came before. I understand that people are up in arms about Superman losing his pants, but this is the real outrage. GA doesn't deserve this. This book is C R A P!!

As for the rest of this stupidity, I didn't even bother wasting my money.

You want to read something good?
Read the new TEENAGE MUTANT NINJA TURTLES. You read that right. The Turtles are back from IDW. But this time, there's no pizza, no cowa-bunga, and no Be-Bop. Just ass-kickin' Turtle goodness. Kevin Eastman style, bitches! 'Nuff said.

Also, I would recommend Atomic Robo from Red 5. This book is the most consistently good comic produced today. Great art AND story. Fun and funny characters, all in all a great read. There are 5 volumes at this point (or more...), so check them out. Spend your $3 wisely.

And don't think I have nothing to say about Marvel. I'm just tired as I'm sure you are from reading all this. I'll harp on them next time.

Go buy stuff at Comic Explosion. And tell Scott you like his blog. It'll probably piss him off. Everything else does.

-R