web stats

CSBG Archive

Here are some links for you to click on hooray

Michel Gondry on Green Hornet:  New York.

Alan Moore Talks Comics, Superheroes, is Interesting:  Wired.

The Colonel writes some pulp:  Here Comes a Regular  (sorry, that one’s kind of self-serving)

 

12 Comments

That Moore article is awesome. His analysis of the origin of super-heroes is simplistic (a fact he admits) since most of the genesis of the super-hero mentality that started in the 60′s and 70′s came from American IMMIGRANTS (and mostly Jewish at that) who felt the need to be protected form the evils of the world; as opposed to it finding root in some notion of imperialist dogma touted by a federal regime. The fact they lived in the USA – not “America”, there’s no such country – is only relevent in that in was in the USA where these creations found their footing. It was evil that was made simplistic and absolute, not the other way around.

I would also challenge that, to ape his example, exploring the ‘true’ origins of James Bond is somehow more relevent than enjoying the made up origin is akin to intellectual snobbery. Fictional stories based almost entirely on truth aren’t any more/less interesting or satisfying than those based less so. It’s the story itself that determines that. All things being equal then I would agree with him but that is not often the case. LOEG Vol. 3 may have been based more on truth than Elephantmen: War Toys but I found the former overloaded with facts and asides that did little to further the story yet found the latter much more interesting and entertaining with a great deal of detail to explore, albeit fake detail.

Michel Gondry on Green Hornet is…unexpected, to say the least.

I really have no idea what to expect from that movie now — and I couldn’t be happier about that.

“Watchmen without the irony” is a pretty good distillation of the overall direction of Marvel & DC over the past 5 years. You’ve got people swimming against the current, but not many of them.

Aside from that, Alan Moore is a brilliant madman, and we’re lucky to have him.

A good interview from Moore, who in my experience is hit or miss. This one, he seemed to just rant enough, and not too much to lose me.

David: How’d you get your hands on LoEG Vol 3 so soon? Or did you mean the Black Dossier?

Sorry, meant Black Dossier – I’ve been calling it Vol 3 since it came out. Prob should stop that since the real Vol. 3 is in the pipeline.

LOEG: Black Dossier was the first Alan Moore book that I’ve which was actually bad. Admittedly, i have not read all the lightly regarded stuff he did at Image, so it was a shock. It had some good ideas, but they were not fleshed out.

Moore reminds me of Don Henley before the Eagles re-united. His old stuff was amazing and while his new stuff can be at that level, it just is not as consistent. The reason is that he broke up with a key collaborator. In interviews, he is always eager to dismiss the old stuff and rip into his old partner.

However, Moore has tried to re-build elements of the DC Universe that he left behind several times. It has rarely produced his best work. The first volume of LOEG was the best version of that effort, but there again he was weaving stuff that already existed together. As it has progressed, it has not held together especially well.

Dean: Have you read Lost Girls? I wouldn’t say that was very good, either.

I have not read “Lost Girls”. We have a toddler and, while I am pretty liberal, having a porn comic in the house did not seem wise.

Dean, who do you mean by the “key collaborator”? DC Comics?

Don’t blame you for not liking Black Dossier. Outside of that, I’d say Moore’s post-DC work has been pretty impressive, though.

Dean, who do you mean by the “key collaborator”? DC Comics?

Plok, I meant more the “DC Universe”. The Charlton Universe obviously worked just as well, so I am sure Moore could have done amazing work for Marvel or Archie. The point is that he seems to need characters with long-ish histories as a starting point.

Nor am I saying that his “solo records” are all bad. Some of his later work is better than his earlier work. I thought ‘From Hell” was amazing. The first LOEG was a breath of fresh air and the second was certainly fun. It is just that, during his DC period, nearly everything was great. Working alone, Moore has a spottier track record. I cannot assume going in that it going to be great, or even good.

Moore never seems to rip out those great single issues anymore. Geoff Johns is making a nice living re-working a handful of Moore Green Lantern tales. I can’t remember the last time Moore dropped a single issue that rich in throw away ideas.

Sadly, life is too short to waste time with bad comics, so I wait for the reviews. It is a shame, since Moore was the last comic book writer was “review proof” for me.

Well, I think I’ll agree with you in part, Dean — Moore definitely profits by having some set of conventions to subvert. But, did you really not think ABC allowed him to do that just as effectively as DC? Personally I think the only thing he’s done that could be regarded as a clunker is Black Dossier (even though I enjoyed it, myself)…

Also, in my opinion Lost Girls is well worth the money. There again, of course, you have conventions to subvert and worlds to view from different angles, so I don’t think it goes against your point.

Leave a Comment

 

Categories

Review Copies

Comics Should Be Good accepts review copies. Anything sent to us will (for better or for worse) end up reviewed on the blog. See where to send the review copies.

Browse the Archives