Comic Book Resources

Oh, I forgot – the superhero comics you like (New Avengers) are freakin’ fantastic, and the ones I like suck. Thanks for the reminder.

Of course nothing is at stake in any comics or any other entertainment venue. Cooke, however, doesn’t even make any effort. This issue was more egregious than the other two, because there’s no real crime, there’s no real bad guy (despite the presence of the Octagon), there’s no real resolution of the totally absent crime, and there’s no point beyond showing us how bad-ass Silk Satin is. I enjoyed issues #1 and 3 without really thinking they were the greatest comics ever, but this was even less compelling. The art may be in the telling, but what is being told has to be a bit more than “Look how cool Silk Satin is.” So what?

Army @ Love. Yeah. I have NO IDEA if I liked it or not. I like that Veitch sort of made an effort to tell a complete story. I didn’t like that he pretty much failed.

So what is the interplay between the characters, the further exploration of the fun Hussein character, and, an introduction to another fun character. There’s the absolutely beautiful art and coloring.

And I appreciate that if you think Cooke “isn’t even trying” to make it dangerous, then at least he’s not treating us like idiots. “OH WOW SUPERMAN MIGHT REALLY DIE NOW!!!!!”

There’s “no bad guy”? Since when is that necessary? Conflict comes from all kinds of sources, not just a guy in a mask. You’ve go the conflict of Silk and the Spirit, them both and the Octagon, all three and Hussein . . .that’s a heaping amount of conflict there. I just don’t get the complaint.

I’ve never said New Avengers is fantastic, but it’s fun and devoid of Star Trek jokes.

Is there any new material in that F&TGM collection? I’ve got three of the four original issues and I’m looking for an excuse to buy the trade… introductions, sketchbooks? I love that book but my copies are stiil in good nick, so I don’t know if I can jusrify the spend.

Intro by Chaykin, outro by Mignola, both new.

I’m certainly not saying The Spirit is a bad comic book. It’s fun, it’s a breezy read, it is very pretty. I just don’t understand why everyone else thinks it’s the greatest thing ever. That’s all. I don’t get why you (and others) love it so much and hate other books that are similar to it. I mean, this issue reads like an episode of Moonlighting. Is Moonlighting one of the greatest television shows ever? (I like Moonlighting, by the way.) If you believe that, okay.

As for Star Trek references, I don’t know any Star Trek references, so I don’t get them. I have been reading both X-Factor and Fallen Angel for quite some time and have never felt like there were obnoxious Star Trek references in them. Give me an example from this month’s issue, and I’ll accept your criticism. Or last month’s issue. Or any of the 17 issues of X-Factor. I’m not saying they’re not there, just that I don’t notice them because I’m not a Star Trek guy. If you can’t give me one, please stop talking about it.

I’ve never said the Spirit was wonderful or the best comic evarrrr or anything. I just think it’s fun and beautifully-crafted.

You’re not tricking me into spending money on a PAD comic. If there aren’t Star Trek jokes, there are definitely puns, other nerd jokes, or at least weird sexual hangups on display. I tried X-Factor back when Sook was drawing it so well, but when he left, i saw no reason to waste my time watching PAD tickle himself.

Geez. Don’t fight guys. It’s demeaning. We should all get together and, like, insult the shit out of the Howling Curmudgeons or somethin’. That would be more fun.

(For the record: I’m the guy who always defends Superman/Batman, right? And I thought New Avengers and X-Factor were both pretty terrible.)

See, I told you to get Brave and Bold instead of The Spirit.

“If there aren’t Star Trek jokes, there are definitely puns, other nerd jokes, or at least weird sexual hangups on display.”

The first three go without saying, but weird sexual hangups? Which PAD comics have I been missing?

SEAN

I like the Spirit. I think it’s one of the best books put out today. It hearkens back to the glory days of Eisner and has it’s own distinctive style at the same time. Every solicit for Army@Love has had me confused before, and I’m almost glad to see that the actual first issue had that same affect on others.

Joe, you seem a bit off here. I had to read the Spirit review three times to understand what you were trying to say because the PAD hate came out of nowhere and didn’t make a lot of sense either way. You haven’t liked past PAD stories, PAD writes Stark Trek novels, so obviously PAD forces constant and poorly-done references to Star Trek throughout everything else he writes? I read X-Factor and haven’t noticed any such thing. Comes off like a desperate and misplaced attack. Similar to the one at the top of the column to PAD again and in reference to Brave and the Bold #2.

I hate it when mommy and daddy fight.

Nerd slapfight!

Well, PAD-fight all aside, the thing I loved most about this week’s comics? “The Punisher Presents”. I love the idea of a comic about a sociopath being billed as though it were Masterpiece Theatre.

An excellent comic, might I add….

My big problem with Darywn Cooke is that I love his art, but as a writer I think he is lacking.

Not in that Chuck Austen ‘Holy fuck I hate myself for owning more than one issue by that guy’, but in that ‘Yeah, so?’ kinda way.

And it’s also not really the writing that holds me back from really enjoying his work.

Take New Frontier for instance. I have the first trade. It’s alright – I like the story with the Flash, and some of the art is brilliant.
But it’s a complete mess and I’m not really sure what the point to it all is, and really feel no need to get the second trade.
And yet Joe Rice wants it to pinch him, gently, in the naughty parts.

When I read Darwyn Cooke’s work I kinda enjoy it, but spend the rest of the time going ‘What the hell are these guys seeing that I’m not???’.

There’s a good chance that I’ll pick up the first trade of his Spirit book, to see if he lives up to the promise I think he shows, but I bet put it down and think ‘…’, and later I’ll remember the reviews and wonder just what the hell it is I’m missing out on.

I don’t get what makes Cooke’s fans think his work is ‘da bomb’. What makes it so much better than Giffen and DeMatties Formerly Known As Justice League for instance?
Or Kurt Busiek’s silver age stuff?

One other thing: If you hate PAD, is there any point in going ‘This book I love is better than anything from PAD’?
I mean that’s a bit obvious from the outset.

And finally: I don’t currently read any PAD books (I’d like to try Fallen Angel, but can’t find the first DC trade), and I don’t know Star Trek, but if he has made a reference, is it any more intrusive than the sheer amount of pop culture references in every other comic book at the moment?
Brian K Vaughn is defientley the worst at the moment, though many other writers aren’t far behind.
It was funny when Tarrantino did it, kinda cute when Whedon did it, but now it’s over.
Could writers just stop with the pop culture references – people don’t talk like that!!!

Psst…FunkyGreenJerusalem, I bought both volumes at once, so I’ll save you some time. The point of ‘New Frontier’ is, “I LUV Green Lantern, Superman Sux, Dinosaurs are cool, and if you cram enough nerdporn and Silver Age continuity references into a book, nobody will notice that it doesn’t have a plot.”

……I’m gonna get flamed for this one…

re: Star Trek jokes
Aren’t you reading Hyacinth? It’s a running joke there. Truth is, I don’t read PAD books and one big reason are his near-constant nerd jokes, whether they be Star Trek, other comic, punny, or those other “humor” devices of which he seems so proud.

relatedly re: pop culture references
Yeah, they can be annoying. But I think they’re appropriate in certain cases when done well. Just throwing in a band name usually just shows how lame and out-of-touch the writer is, but if someone does their research and it feels right for the character, go right ahead. At least they’re not just nerd culture references.

re: Cooke/New Frontier
Cooke is just a superb stylist, designer, and craftsman that even if he couldn’t write I’d still want to see his books. But I DO like his writing. As I mentioned before, his control of pacing is great, and the way he weaves multiple plotlines is almost effortless. I’ve never understood the “there’s no plot in New Frontier” complaint. Yeah, there is, a pretty simple one. Stuff is going crazy all around the world because of [spoiler] and some new heroes and some old ones get together in spite of themselves and beat it. There’s also some great political allegory stuff under the surface and generational semi-conflict. It’s a big plot, and the plot isn’t always the focus (thank Christ) but it’s there.

“Just throwing in a band name usually just shows how lame and out-of-touch the writer is, but if someone does their research and it feels right for the character, go right ahead.”

If only.
These days it feels to me that every second line of dialouge is a pop culture reference in comics.
It pulls me out of the story a lot of the time, especially when characters who shouldn’t be saying them do.
I’m surprised so many writers are into it – it will date their work within five years.

The only writer who does them well is Garth Ennis (I’m reading Preacher in trades). He limits it to people occasionally talking about movies that are really old, the odd Pogues quote, and back in the 90′s, that Kurt Cobain was an arsehole.

“At least they’re not just nerd culture references.”

In PAD’s first X-Factor run there were Wayne’s World and Muppet jokes.
Surely they aren’t, or weren’t then, nerd jokes – but pop culture references – before it was cool!
That said, I didn’t like them then.

Joe Rice said:

“I’ve never understood the “there’s no plot in New Frontier” complaint. Yeah, there is, a pretty simple one.”

That’s…well, technically true, sort of. I’ll credit that the opening sequence sets up, “Hey, there’s a mysterious island out there with dinosaurs on it.” Somewhere about a little over half-way through, we get a sequence with the Martian Manhunter that suggests, “Hey, something creepy and ominous is about to happen.” Then, about thirty pages from the end, a big monster the size of an island that grows dinosaurs shows up and all the heroes team up to beat it.

The problem is, that’s not enough plot to sustain twelve issues. Arguably, it’s not even enough to sustain one. The rest of the series is Cooke padding the story with various vignettes of “This is Hero A. He is good and I like him.” and “This is Hero B. He is also good and I like him too.” and “This is Green Lantern. He is like Jesus, only better because he has a magic ring.” and “This is Superman. He is a boot-licking toady and a wimp.” (There may be some who’ve guessed that part of my problem with the series stems from the bizarre hagiography of Hal Jordan and the equally bizarre disdain for Superman. These people are what are technically known as “right.”)

Honestly, I don’t want to dogpile on this book, because I know you like it a lot and I hate being a jerk, but…it’s not a story. It’s a proto-story, the kind of thing good writers did when they were eight and didn’t understand what went into a story, where you thought you could just take a bunch of random scenes of all your favorite characters fighting bad guys, and then have them team up at the end against a big bad guy that didn’t need to make sense because you were eight and were writing it for yourself. Only Cooke sold it to DC for large sums of money. (Which, I suppose, good for him. He’s got the money, he’s got a big hardcover version of this that he can use to beat me to death if he ever reads this, so at least someone got something out of this.)

So, yeah, sorry. If it helps, I’ve been holding back on this rant for a month because I didn’t want to make anyone feel bad.

I felt New Frontier was slight, but fun. The art’s gorgeous, and I don’t regret the purchases, but I found other “nostalgia” books (e.g. Golden Age, JLA Year One, Astro City) more entertaining, and with better character development. The political allegory (going from Eisenhower’s era to Kennedy’s) is pretty clear, and I loved the Flash and Martian Manhunter sequences and the openning, but I felt the pacing was hit-or-miss. Although I don’t have anything against Hal Jordan, I found his story arc predictable and boring. The Big 3, Green Arrow, and the Challengers could have had more “screen time.” Similarly, the first 2 issues of the Spirit were enjoyable, but not enough to compel me to keep buying.

Joe: I don’t understand the compulsion you have towards criticizing Burgas and taking shots at Peter David. For running jokes, they’re not funny, and detract from your otherwise enjoyable and informative reviews.

As someone who likes Peter David AND Darwyn Cooke, I think both of you need to clean the sand out of your vaginas. Because there’s nothing dumber than two nerds each angrily telling each other “The stuff I like is less nerdy than the stuff you like.”

“In PAD’s first X-Factor run there were Wayne’s World and Muppet jokes.
Surely they aren’t, or weren’t then, nerd jokes – but pop culture references – before it was cool!”

Hey, listen, I enjoy Peter David’s X-Factor (the old one, I didn’t get into this new incarnation), but doesn’t, like, the second issue open with several pages of Weird Al Yankovic doing a parody of a They Might Be Giants song?

To clarify: I’m not making a point about Darwyn Cooke’s writing relative to Peter David. I’m not making a point about Peter David at all. My feelings on Peter David are an entirely separate issue, as they should be, because I really don’t understand the idea of saying, “Oh yeah? Well, he/she is better than (insert name here)!” as a response to criticism of a writer/artist.

What I’m saying about New Frontier should in no way be taken as a defense of Peter David, an attack on Peter David, or an indication that I’m interested in the “Is Peter David good/bad?” question. (In case anyone cares…I’d have to give it considerable thought. There was a time I was an unabashed PAD adorer, but that was over a decade ago. I’ve gone through my backlash phase, where I was thoroughly sick of his writing and nitpicked it to death. Now? Dunno. As I say, I’d have to give it considerable thought.)

Oh, and since CSBG apparently follows Quesada’s thinking in parenthetical references in past continuity: The bug up Joe’s butt in reference to sex in PAD comics comes from the 1997 Supergirl/Mary Marvel one-shot, in which Mary is sexually harassed by a skeevy small-town sheriff. Which is probably sticking in his mind at the moment due to the Countdown solicits and Brave & The Bold 2. Still, he’s making a sweeping accusation about a body of work based on one 10-year-old comic that mainly sticks up his craw because of the particular character involved.

well, it only got a passing mention here, but I finally actually read Brave and the Bold 2, and while the whole GL/Supergirl creepage didn’t put me totally off the book, it WAS legitimately weird.

the thing is, there’s WAY more of it than Joe’s post earlier in the week indicates. That page he linked to is the most extended example, but it’s played as a thread thru the entire issue.

As one page, and a random thought balloon? Weird, but not destructive. As part of the whole issue, coupled with Perez’s fetishizing Supergirl as some kind of strange toddler with her underpants showing while she fights big monsters? ICK.

more on-topic: I really don’t understand the Peter David slams. if you don’t think he’s funny, fine. but his jokes aren’t bad–they’re just not funny to YOU. i’ve been a fan of his since I was a wee nerd, giggling at his star trek: the next generation novels.

As for Greg: I think anyone viewing The Spirit through the rubric of conventional superhero comics is doing both himself and the material a disservice. I’m not sure what analogy to draw, but you definitely need to look at it from another angle.

As for Checkmate, I’m with Funky’s comments in the other thread. Unless your store is giving out free blowjobs with each issue, I don’t get how you could like one-eyed, broody Alan Scott and grim-n-gritty assassin Fire.

Dear Joe

I AM a middle-aged woman, and yes, The Punisher Presents: Barracuda, is indeed…a hoot.

This may be slightly of topic, but I will go ahead and say it anyway.

It kind of seems that comic book fans/critics are especially occupied with the story of the book they want to critisize (in this case New Frontier and the Spirit). Most of the time the story is an important part of a comic book, perhaps the most important even, but this is far from always the case. The “Character plot” of a book is often just as important as the “story plot”, and sometimes a story is no more than a largely unimportant backdrop for various themes that the writer wants to explore. There are many litterary classics and great films that do not contain any story of significance, so why should this not be the case with comics as well?

This being said, I have neither read New Frontier nor Spirit, so I don`t really have anything to add to the actual discussion.

Except that I HAVE read the Brave ande the Bold, and I think it sucked!

And by the way, turning women into sexual objects is strictly speaking something that a lot of writers do all the time (unfortunately). It seems to be especially common with Supergirl and Mary Marvel however, which is a little disturbing since they`re, you know, children..

Michael – I don’t think I’m viewing The Spirit through a rubric of conventional superheroing. Maybe I am.

I have no problem with stories that don’t have much plot, Martin. One of my favorite movies ever is Mindwalk, which features three people walking around Mont St. Michel chatting. However, Cooke’s script, while fun, doesn’t really offer much in terms of anything beyond playful banter between the two principals. Yes, I enjoyed it, but it felt extremely lightweight. You mention “themes the writer wants to explore.” I don’t see any themes being explored here. That’s all.

Joe, what’s with your Burgas and Peter David fixation? I mean, I have a pretty petty and irrational fixation on Jeph Loeb myself, but I usually try to at least take my potshots at him in discussions related to him. The segue from reviewing the Spirit to slamming Burgas and David out of the blue just looks bad.

John Seavey:

I don’t see Cook’s portrayal of Superman as disdain for the character. Superman had a specific arc in that story which followed his transformation from a follower to a leader. He may not be the main character (it’s Hal’s story for the most part) but he redeems himself in the end.

Honestly Joe your Spirit review sucked because it was more of a diss towards Greg then an actual review of the book. I didn’t get impression why the Spirit is worth reading (and it’s a book I like). I just got a nasty remark about Greg and books he likes. That’s kind of tacky.

Not a fan of Greg’s reviews myself (or PAD for that matter) but I don’t think he’s ever written any swipe towards you in any of them.

“You mention “themes the writer wants to explore.” I don’t see any themes being explored here. That’s all.”

I believe you Greg. I suppose thats why I haven`t bothered with buying the Spirit.

Actually, what I wrote wasn`t aimed at you at all. It is just a general trend that I see everywhere. Comic fans often have a tendency to focus on “solid storytelling” as the only thing that matters. It is a primitive form of criticism, I think.

And this is still off topic. Sorry!

Re: Brave & the Bold #2, I think the running “17″ bit might have been overlook-able had the WHOLE PLOT not been pinned on Hal recognizing Kara as more than a sex object after she comes up with the cunning plan of transforming into a pedophile’s fetishistic image of the innocent whore. Thereby completely objectifying herself. Have Waid or Perez EVER BEEN LAID?!?!

“There are many litterary classics and great films that do not contain any story of significance”

Martin – I definitely agree with the point you’re making, but fiction produced on a serial level does, generally, need to maintain a higher level of plot. It’s just a question of the medium; people aren’t buying one ticket to the story, they’re buying installments each month.

I think a very big general problem with the comic industry these days is writing to the trades, rather than the issues. I’ve finally been reading some of the old Grant Morrison stuff like ‘Animal Man’ and ‘Doom Patrol’, and the thing that I keep being struck by is “I remember when comics used to be monthly stories”.

I am definitely not saying character needs to be ignored, but a book which is just about exploring characters and not plot sounds, to me, like it should be a graphic novel; it sounds like it would suffer from being a monthly book, because the audience would be consistently frustrated.

I finally got into ‘The Wire’ this past season, about halfway through, and the thing that struck me, watching the 4th season on On-Demand and then the first three on DVD, is that, the way that story unfolds, it will *kill* me to watch the fifth season week-to-week. And part of it is that the show very rarely has any sort of resolution within a single episode. I think a lot of comics these days have the same problem; I stopped reading Garth Ennis’s “Punisher” month-to-month (in fact, most of his books suffer from this problem now); the story just doesn’t play as well when read six different days over five months.

Just to clarify, my potshot at Greg and my potshot at PAD were unrelated. And PAD’s work shows a lot of sexual weirdness even ignoring his Mary Marvel Molested story, which I wasn’t even thinking of at the time. The PAD jokes were pretty much aimed at Hyacinth or anyone reading his blog. If Muppet Show and They Might Be Giants references are your cup of tea, I didn’t mean to offend.

As for what my problem is with the two gentlemen, I’m sure Greg is a nice guy but he writes glowingly positive reviews for terrible books on a site that is supposed to highlight actual goodness. It’s stuck in my craw ever since he started here. Now, I realize it’s unlikely to change, but I’m also probably not going to start loving it any time soon, either.

As for PAD, if you have to ask why someone would make fun of him, you’ll never understand.

Also, I think Martin makes good points.

“Is Moonlighting one of the greatest television shows ever?”

Yes, but only until Mark Harmon showed up. Damn your black heart, Mark Harmon.

“Comic fans often have a tendency to focus on “solid storytelling” as the only thing that matters. It is a primitive form of criticism, I think.
And this is still off topic. Sorry!”

Can’t argue with that. I’ll take “interesting” and “fun” over “solid.” I can respect craftsmenship but I’m looking to be entertained. Same deal with art. Yeah it’s nice if everything is rendered nicely and anatomical correct but I want my eye to stimulated.

I’m not sure if the Spirit surpasses past “solid storytelling.” It’s a solid book but I feel like Cooke is just treading water before he does something really exciting.

I would love to see him do a creator owned book or heck another Green Lantern book. Imagine a Cooke channeling Jack Kirby style Green Lantern Corps book.

Damn this blogs lack of an edit function.

Too many typos above to list. Fuck craftmanship and proper grammar!

Sean: I agree that serial fiction has need of a stronger plot to maintain the readers` interest than non-serial fiction (or whatever it`s called), but it is by no means enough. In 9 cases out of 10 a comic book must offer more than an exciting story for it to be really good. Doom Patrol and Animal Man are, in my opinion, examples of books that do just that.

Grant said:

“I don’t see Cook’s portrayal of Superman as disdain for the character. Superman had a specific arc in that story which followed his transformation from a follower to a leader. He may not be the main character (it’s Hal’s story for the most part) but he redeems himself in the end.”

Except that I think this is, eerily enough, a syndrome Peter David commented on in one of his ‘But I Digress’ columns. (Dear god, it’s true! The discussion can never escape Peter David!!!!) He referenced it in regard to Superman’s code against killing, but it applies here too; the idea that Superman’s moral framework and heroic attitude have to be shown as coming from someplace within his superheroic career, instead of being a part of his natural upbringing.

I object, strongly and vehemently, that Superman would need to “learn” that he doesn’t have to do what the government tells him when he knows it’s wrong. Honestly, Superman did more in _the real world_ to break the back of the Ku Klux Klan than he did in ‘New Frontier’, and that’s messed up.

And Martin O said:

“There are many literary classics and great films that do not contain any story of significance, so why should this not be the case with comics as well?”

Reminds me of something I said once when talking about a general rule of storytelling. “Alan Moore and Neil Gaiman broke this rule, but if you’re reading this, with two exceptions, you’re not Neil Gaiman or Alan Moore.” Good storytelling is a fundamental of…well, of good storytelling. You need a plot. Brilliant writers can sometimes get away with doing things the rest of us can’t, and following their example can demonstrate, quite dramatically, why the rest of us can’t get away with it.

You are right, though, in that I didn’t get heavily into the themes of ‘New Frontier’, nor into the character development thereof. I felt bad enough trashing its plot.

See, you don’t like what it did to your superhero you like and then you attack it. It’s better-constructed than most message board arguements but it’s the same thing.

It’s stuck in my craw ever since he started here. Now, I realize it’s unlikely to change, but I’m also probably not going to start loving it any time soon, either.

Yeah, so obviously the mature and sensible way to handle it is to take irrelevantly personal potshots.

Can you at least take ‘em to private email, or something, so that the rest of us can enjoy your thoughtful, entertaining critiques without feeling like we’ve walked into a room in the middle of a fight?

First off, I hope they weren’t personal. I’ve no problem with Greg personally, just, uh, critically? Is that the right adverb? But if the jibes are now coming off as less friendly/acquaintancely teasing and more outright meanness, you’re right, that’s horribly immature and not the way to go about this. I apologize to Greg and anyone else reading this. I’ve stated my case and should hold my tongue from here on.

“And PAD’s work shows a lot of sexual weirdness even ignoring his Mary Marvel Molested story, which I wasn’t even thinking of at the time.”

Really? I mean, I’m pretty well-read on the guy, and I don’t see that much of it. Bits and pieces in certain stories, sure; if you wanna say Sachs and Violens is loaded with it, you’d be right. But as a rule? What specifically are you thinking of?

Joe Rice said:

“See, you don’t like what it did to your superhero you like and then you attack it.”

I’d complain about this, but gramatically speaking, it doesn’t actually suggest that I complained about it _because_ of what it did to Superman.

I will, however, point out that Superman is not “my superhero.” I’m no more a Superman fan than I am an Aquaman, Batman, or Green Lantern fan–I have a casual interest in them, I’ve read their books at one point or another, they’re important characters in the DC universe, but they’re not characters I’m passionate about, like Doctor Who or the Fantastic Four. My complaint is not “You were mean to Superman, and I like him tonz!!!” It’s “You really don’t seem to understand what makes Superman tick, and that’s a pretty major flaw given that he’s one of the main characters in the book.”

“You really don’t seem to understand what makes Superman tick, and that’s a pretty major flaw given that he’s one of the main characters in the book.”

This criticism, though, is pretty much what Joe had you pegged for. And it isn’t valid. A character needn’t adhere to everything that’s come before in order to be a part of a good story.

As much as I appreciate your ‘storytelling engine’ posts, and agree that they can be useful devices for ongoing characters with decades-long histories and many-multiple creators, they aren’t the only ways to make characters work.

Besides, to call Superman “a boot-licking toady and a wimp” in Cooke’s New Frontier is a redonkulous simplification. It’s not even a simplification, it’s an obfuscation…I’d say it’s out and out wrong. He works for the government…big whoop. He aligned himself with Dwight D. Eisenhower, one of our nation’s greatest presidents…for whom the series seems to have a healthy respect (save the one disappointing scene with Wonder Woman).

Clark was horrified by a slaughter. A condoned slaughter. A condoned slaughter being celebrated. A slaughter being condoned and celebrated by one of his closest friends. This may not be exactly in-line with the Bundist-killing Superman of golden age yore, but both interpretations are valid. I, for one, prefer a Superman who wants to avoid killing at all costs, even in a situation as dire as the one Diana describes.

“Superman’s moral framework and heroic attitude (are) shown as coming from someplace within his superheroic career, instead of being a part of his natural upbringing.

I object, strongly and vehemently, that Superman would need to ‘learn’ that he doesn’t have to do what the government tells him when he knows it’s wrong.”

See, I don’t even know where you’re getting this. When does he do something he knows is wrong? When does he do something wrong at all? He helps Batman escape the government and tries to work within it for change. He’s a patriot who doesn’t want to give up on what makes America great. Most of all, he’s a leader of men who inspires everyone to victory in the end.

I’d even argue Grant’s assertion that he ‘becomes’ a leader…it’s true he steps into the role more knowingly in the end, but he’s shown as having the heart of the people throughout.

I love Superman, and I love New Frontier. And I take issue with the idea that Cooke shows ANY kind of disdain towards the character or that if I enjoy his portrayal, it’s because I don’t know what ‘makes him tick.’

Another word…about New Frontier as a ‘proto-story.’

This is absolutely correct. And it (along with Cooke’s amazing set dressing and undeniable panache) is a big reason why the series so beloved by many.

It’s primal. It cuts out the bullshit and speaks to something at our very core. Something we all knew when we were eight, but complicated (and possibly forgot) along the way: Superheroes are fucking awesome. Sorry if that’s too simple for you, John, but there it is.

DC characters are about brightness and hope and creating humanity’s best possible future. That’s THEIR story-telling engine. In a time where most of DC’s cape book output features graphic dismemberments and teenagers as sex objects, New Frontier was a god damned refreshing change of pace from all that nonsense.

It made me believe again. It made me remember why I enjoyed superheroes to begin with.

Michael, I don’t have my PAD comics anymore, but I remember Hulk in particular having a lot of weird, just-off sex and romance stuff. These, on top of killing Betsy after a nasty divorce, opened my eyes to one reason I have trouble reading his stuff.

If you’ll take a look at Wonder Man #4, you’ll notice something funny (which I already pointed out over on my site).
Beast is drawn to look strikingly similar to PAD! It’s HIlarious.

“DC characters are about brightness and hope and creating humanity’s best possible future. That’s THEIR story-telling engine. In a time where most of DC’s cape book output features graphic dismemberments and teenagers as sex objects, New Frontier was a god damned refreshing change of pace from all that nonsense.

It made me believe again. It made me remember why I enjoyed superheroes to begin with. ”

So you’re saying New Frontiers is DC’s Marvels?

“Michael, I don’t have my PAD comics anymore, but I remember Hulk in particular having a lot of weird, just-off sex and romance stuff.”

Like the superheroes putting on a porno at Rick Jone’s buck’s party, and it turning out that the porno stars his wife to be?

Oh, that’s a good example, Funk.

So the new issue of X-Factor has a reference to Batman, Snake Plissken (whoever the hell that is–apparently the Kurt Russel protagonist from Escape from New York), and the tv series Heroes. Those are three pretty big nerd references.

That PAD Rick Jones bachelor party issue of the Hulk is one of the funniest superhero comics ever.

Jesus, Joe.

Why is it so tough for you to accept that Greg has different taste than you are?

This is so strange to me; I spend approximately 106% of my waking hours fighting with my friends/classmakers/co-workers/guy who runs the hot dog car outside the library over whether or not art is good. There are folks who are perfectly knowledgeable about certain art forms who simply don’t like the stuff that I like.

In fact, I’m fairly sure I’m 180 off from the majority of my friends in terms of ONE major art form. Either we like completely different movies (Jesus, Liz, that Adam Sandler movie with the pudding was great!), Music (John. Jeff LORBER! Three decent songs on the first album – which you don’t like – don’t make up for decades of boring-ass smooth jazz.) or visual arts. (Joe; Marcel Duchamp was a fuckin’ GENIUS. Even if the art wasn’t any good inanofitself, it’s a commentary on the context it’s put in.) or TV (Jon. I’ve seen Smallville. Buffy (which rules) is better than Smallville in every possible way.)

And let’s not even start on how many of my friends like the loathsome, vile, and evil music of the Beastie Boys.

Doesn’t mean the people who disagree with me are idiots. In fact, in all the above cases they’re probably more knowledgable about the context of the works than I am. Liz knows way more about movies than I do, John’s got a better grasp of music theory, actually plays guitar, and is way more knowledgeable about the music of that era.

It’d never occur to me to be offended by different tastes, as long as I’m dealing with someone who can shorck together an effective argument and knows stuff about the art form in question. I *LIKE* hearing different persepctives, and it interests me how people’s tastes develop, especially if they’re radically different from my own.

And I’m not holding the fact that you like Weezer against YOU. (Even though Weezer are really, really terrible.*)

* Except for the Sweater Song.