Comic Book Resources

Can we please vote for neither? The career of Paris Hilton makes more sense than either.

Hahahahaha! Good question.

Sadly, Jean Loring makes more sense than an intelligent Solomon Grundy. And Identity Crisis #7 was the worst single issue of anything ever.

I can’t imagine the amazing new lows JLA will reach!

I think you’re right, Bill.

I’m gonna wait and see where the story actually GOES in JLoA before I judge anything off a one-page cliffhanger in a series I’ve been mainly enjoying (everything with Red Tornado, in particular, is fabulous). Does that make me a bad comics fan, or just a bad INTERNET comics fan?

neither, I.Man. I’m rather enjoying JLA as well, although I’m in total agreement with most of the criticisms levelled at the writer (who does seem rather over-hyped). It’s certainly a far cry from Morrison’s JLA, but I think DC is just happy that it’s not the Detroit-era again.

That said, Grundy makes more sense, but only marginally. Mostly due to the portrait of multiple Grundys last seen in Starman, which allows for a lot of wiggle room when dealing with him.

In light of that Starman story, the Grundy situation makes complete sense. It’s established that when he dies, he comes back with a new personality, some smarter than others. This time he came back as a genius, and he’d like to keep it that way, hence he wants to become an actual immortal.

Well, maybe it’s the Ultra-Humanite with his brain his a Grundy’s body. Or something.

This is like Aliens Vs Predator….

…….whoever wins, we lose.

They both make sense, the real question is whether they were good ideas. I think smart Solomon Grundy is a good idea. Don’t get me started on Jean Loring.

I’m gonna wait and see where the story actually GOES in JLoA before I judge anything off a one-page cliffhanger in a series I’ve been mainly enjoying (everything with Red Tornado, in particular, is fabulous). Does that make me a bad comics fan, or just a bad INTERNET comics fan?

Do note that any information given to us AFTER a mystery is revealed does not make the reveal, itself, better.

The only issues that apply here are the ones BEFORE the reveal, because that is when we can judge whether, based on the information given, the reveal was a good one.

So now IS the appropriate time to judge the reveal, not “when we see where the story actually GOES.”

Booyah.

Sadly, yep, Loring. If a writer wants to make Grundy smart, fine – it might bug me, but, whatever. But then Grundy the Mastermind? If the DC has enough of anything, it’s genius villains. Why would everyone suddenly end up working for Grundy?

I can understand Loring. I just have to imagine what story I would write if I were a huge misogynist, and also had no idea how to end a mystery story. Then it makes perfect sense.

Grundy made more sense, as it’s been done before and is thus more a recycled plotline than a shocking reveal. The only way then resolution of Identity Crisis could make less sense would be if it had been illustrated by Pablo Picasso.

Prior to Identity Crisis, my only exposure to Jean Loring was the Comics 101 column on rhe silver age Atom. And based just on what an incredibly evil bitch she was in the snippets of stories the article presented, I had little difficulty accepting her as the killer.

I never bought the misogynist thing either, since so many of the arguements in favor of it were completely detached from logic.

“Deathstroke defeated the female heroes ina humiliating fashion! That proves Meltzer’s a misogynist!”

“But weren’t the male heroes also defeated in humiliating ways?”

“Shut up! You hate women!”

Now, I’m not saying there isn’t a case to made against IC, but people bringing up such bullshit arguements really hurt the credibilty of the legitimate critics.

I agree that we can’t judge the reveal until we get the full revelation. Like the previous poster said, there’s apparently a precedent for Grundy having varying levels of intelligence. Who knows, Meltzer may have a good logical reveal coming up. Based on his previous writing, I sincerely doubt it and expect a totally idiotic resolution, but who knows? He may surprise us yet.

Does that make me a bad comics fan, or just a bad INTERNET comics fan?

Bad internet fan. Not professing your irrational hatred Identity Crisis is grounds for the nerd police to call up your ISP and have your service terminated. It’s like living in 1960s China and not quoting Mao’s little red book…

“Not professing your irrational hatred Identity Crisis is grounds for the nerd police to call up your ISP and have your service terminated.”

Good thing my hatred is totally rational, then.

Isn’t a smart Grundy just basically Mr. Fixit?

Those folks down in Limbotown have a lot of explaining to do. Or that Grundy is actually the product of Seven Soldiers. It would be typical of Meltzer to so misunderstand Morrison’s story.

Not professing your irrational hatred Identity Crisis is grounds for the nerd police to call up your ISP and have your service terminated.

What’s an irrational hatred of Identity Crisis like? Hating the book for being too logical and well-written?

You know, in all this back-and-forth about whether or not Grundy being smart makes sense, no one’s really taking into account the point my bride just made. Julie looked over my shoulder and asked what the fuss was about, so I told her.

She looked horrified. “Smart Grundy? That’s no fun!”

Which really sums up my objection to all of Brad Meltzer’s DC oeuvre in a nutshell. It’s no damn fun.

Tsk, tsk, Mr. Hatcher. Fun is for children! Meltzer’s work is for serious adults.

Serious, serious adults with hardons for tornado robots.

I must say that even though I am totally indifferent to the new JLA, the last-page reveal was really cool. The kind of idea that made me wonder – in the wake of Robinson’s Starman – why no one else had ever thought of it before.

I thought the Jean Loring one worked better in Identity Crisis 7. There were clues everywhere in IC that it was Jean. Those clues really didn’t make any sense, but at least they were there. It didn’t come completely out of left field. This Grundy reveal though, did. Admittedly, I don’t have decades of DC continuity stored up in my brain, so I don’t know if this reveal might have been obvious to some, but I can’t figure out how Amazo, Ivo, Starro, Grundy, and the JLA connect at all.

That being said, I don’t have much of a problem with Smart Grundy, but technically when did Grundy die again? I kind of remember him getting blasted by someone in the red background panels in the last issue of Infinite Crisis, so is it safe to assume he died there?

Brad Meltzer was making me nostalgic for Bob Harras well before the Grundy reveal.

“It would be typical of Meltzer to so misunderstand Morrison’s story.”

What make’s Morrison’s version of Grundy’s origin, which contradicted previous versions, sacred? Why not take Morrison to task for “not understanding” those stories? I liked James Robinson’s version, and that’s what Meltzer seems to be working with.

“It would be typical of Meltzer to so misunderstand Morrison’s story.”

Misunderstand or ignore? I’d have thought you’d applaud him for not following in the “nerd puzzle”.

“Smart Grundy? That’s no fun!”

Why?

Oh, you know I don’t care if things fit together in the nerd puzzle. I didn’t read the Justice League book. I’ve yet to like something by the writer or by the artist, and the flip-through in the shop looked typical of their output. It’s just funny that such an amazing work as Seven Soldiers kind of ended with the creation of Grundy and here’s Meltzer using him unwell right afterwards.

I’d be surprised if Meltzer even read Seven Soldiers. If he did, his approach to the cape genre seems to indicate he wouldn’t get it, but who knows? Doesn’t matter to me who follows what. This is a dumb book either way.

“Smart Grundy? That’s no fun!”

Why?

Because Solomon Grundy, if he is smart, does not GRUNDY SMASH! and without that what’s the POINT of Solomon Grundy? He’s a BIG DEAD WHITE THING THAT SMASHES PEOPLE.

We’ve already seen the “big strong guy who’s also a criminal genius” thing. Somebody referenced Mr. Fixit, but don’t forget the second Blockbuster either. They’re good for about five or six issues before they get dull.

The worst part about Identity Crisis 7 wasn’t Jean Loring, it was the heroes accepting for a time that the killer was Captain Boomerang. Granted, the murder didn’t fit his boomerang M.O., and he had no motivation to kill Sue Dibny, _and_ he had no way to get past all those security measures. But, y’know, he’s dead, so he did it.

“Because Solomon Grundy, if he is smart, does not GRUNDY SMASH! and without that what’s the POINT of Solomon Grundy? He’s a BIG DEAD WHITE THING THAT SMASHES PEOPLE.”

But why does that mean the possibility of him becoming smart should never ever ever ever be explored? Especially after the widely-accepted understanding that he comes back with a new personality every time he dies?

“We’ve already seen the “big strong guy who’s also a criminal genius” thing. Somebody referenced Mr. Fixit, but don’t forget the second Blockbuster either. They’re good for about five or six issues before they get dull.”

I could very easily say the same about “fill-in-the-blank SMASH!”

Even if Grundy stays smart for a while, DC can always use Mammoth as their go-to “we need a big dumb villain for this scene” guy.

Fun is for children! Meltzer’s work is for serious adults.

Serious, serious adults with hardons for tornado robots.

In what way is a room full of rainbow-colored tornado robots not fun? It’s like they opened the door to find themselves fighting an army of Gummi Bears…

“what way is a room full of rainbow-colored tornado robots not fun? It’s like they opened the door to find themselves fighting an army of Gummi Bears…”

Shh! Don’t give Meltzer any ideas…

“In what way is a room full of rainbow-colored tornado robots not fun? ”

In the lackluster execution way.

“Smart Grundy? That’s no fun!”

Why?

Julie knows Grundy from the Justice League animated show. And she likes that version. She thinks he’s funny.

I could have told her that “that continuity is intact, the Timm-verse Grundy is still dumb,” but when I say things like that she gives me the look that translates as I think you need to turn off the computer for a while.

Wives have looks OTHER than that one?

Sorry, but I gotta say that in principle, at least, Smart Grundy works for me. (Haven’t read the actual issues involved, so the execution might be a botch.) James Robinson pretty clearly and explicitly showed that each time Grundy dies and comes back, we see a different facet of the character; why not a smart evil one? It’s not like it’s a permanent, irrevocable change–next writer doesn’t want to write that Grundy? Oops, Grundy goes through the woodchipper, comes out stupid again.

As to “it contradicts Morrison”…three things. One, I read Seven Soldiers relatively recently, and don’t even remember Grundy being in it, so whatever Morrison did with the character, it can’t have been so great that we should enshrine it as the definitive version, and two, I have said it before and I’ll say it again, Morrison is a great writer, but he’s a lousy writer for a shared universe, because anyone who writes a treatment the next writer can’t monkey with isn’t doing his or her actual job. And three, frankly, if Morrison had written a “smart Grundy” storyline, I can see Declarative Rabbit instead of Curious Cat saying, “Smart Grundy is another brilliant twist from the God of All Comics”. I really feel a lot of this is just “Meltzer can do no right.” (Which, again, is not to say that Meltzer has done a lot right; I will at some point in the not too distant future be discussing the Elongated Man on my own blog, and I will have harsh words about the death of Sue Dibny. But he’s not irredeemably awful.)

I agree with a lot of what John Seavey says regarding Morrison, he is a good writer but is awful for shared universes. And Morrison basically did do his own version of Smart Grundy, except it was with the Shaggy Man AKA The General. I disagree about Meltzer though, he really is irredeemably awful.

I’m just happy that John used The God of All Comics so casually, since I came up with that. I’ll take over the Internets yet!!!!!

To criticize the people’s shortcomings is necessary, … but in doing so we must truly take the stand of the people and speak out of whole-hearted eagerness to protect and educate them. To treat comrades like enemies is to go over to the stand of the enemy.

Well, the Jean Loring reveal left me sick to my stomach, and Grundy didn’t, so I guess that’s the answer.

Man, I didn’t even get to that.
Grundy’s the mastermind? Wow.
I’d basically thrown up my hands by that point at the stultifyingly awful stuff in the captions.

“I’m Hal Jordon and I’m hardcore. My ring chafes my hand. I ignore it. I have work to do. Some people think Boxing Gloves are childish, a remnant of a past time. Well, I’ve got enough willpower behind my punch to make Tyson look like Rodney Dangerfield. I might mail his teeth back to him in prison. I’m like that. Hardcore.”

Get knotted.

I finally read the book. Honestly? The Grundy thing wasn’t that bad. Dumb strong guy gets smart has been done before, first by Waid with Blockbuster in Underworld Unleashed and next by Morrison with Shaggy Man in JLA. I found the mind-numbingly bad narration captions and the wannabe kewl dialogue to be a much worse offense.

Gentle Grundy has been done before by Robinson, so smart Grundy isn’t much of a stretch.

But Jean Loring? Like Alice in Wonderland, we’re asked to believe seven impossible things before breakfast.

1) She loves him far more than he loves her, going against his reason for becoming the Atom in the first place. (ie, to help her win cases so they could get married)

2) She’s a smart woman (and therefore evil, because in Meltzer’s universe, smart women are evil) so she conceives this elaborate plot to bring Ray back to her, rather than doing something simple like throwing on a see through nightie and asking Ray over.

3) She decides to injure her best friend (because she’s an Evil Career Woman rather than a Good Homemaker like Sue).

4) She somehow manages to use Ray’s shrink suit (though if Ray Palmer tried to use the white dwarf star matter to shrink and re-enlarge anything but himself, the thing would blow up.)

5) And she manages to shrink not only herself, but a flamethrower too.

6) A rational person becomes criminally insane overnight (which is impossible, as my social worker dad would tell me)

7) And an idiot as well, or she wouldn’t have left an obvious clue.

Never mind the plot holes, discrepencies, stereotypes, cliches, etc.