Comments on: Into the back issue box #48

By: Ivy

Ivy — Sun, 20 Jun 2010 18:46:21 +0000

Ok, Im a girl! So, here it may show. The Tenth is my favorite comic. Leave a space for all of you to make fun of me on this board. I really do love it though. I only have read “danger girl” and “F5″ besides “the tenth series” and still love it. Im actually still trying to collect the whole series. So,any of you want to throw your old issues my way, i would be appreciative. Thanks BEAU!! I love The Tenth!!

By: Ken Davis

Ken Davis — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 04:59:41 +0000

WOW, now that’s a review and a half for your ass!

By: Greg Burgas

Greg Burgas — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 22:52:57 +0000

Pete: It’s still out there, but it’s definitely not as prevalent as it used to be. Even Tony Daniel has moved on from it!

By: Peter Woodhouse

Peter Woodhouse — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 04:38:08 +0000

Is this comic real? C’mon Greg, you made it up! Just the sort of 3rd-rate Image drek that made me give up comics in the mid-90s. Terrible.
Out of interest, as someone dipping their toe back in the comics water, does this sub-Liefield stuff still get done now, or has that fad thankfully gone?
Pete.

By: Farrell

Farrell — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 04:22:25 +0000

Entertaining review. I always enjoy reading reviews of books of this kind more than I’d ever enjoy reading the books themselves. I disagree with you on one point, however: it seems entirely reasonable to me that the writer not explain to the reader, in issue 4 or 4, where the Tenth’s name came from, what Espy can do, etc. If you pick up an issue that’s the conclusion of an ongoing story, you should expect to have to draw some of your own conclusions from the events in the book. As a reader of a series from beginning to end, I certainly don’t care to read the same explanation (even if expressed in different language) four times.

Beau, I appreciate the passion you always bring to your books (and the various columns you’ve written over the years), and the classy way you chose to respond to this review. Even though you write many books that aren’t to my tastes, I tend to remember good impressions like the one you left here, and it’ll make me more likely to check out your work in the future.

By: FunkyGreenJerusalem

FunkyGreenJerusalem — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 00:04:17 +0000

What’s odd looking at this book, is I remember being quite impressed with a couple of Daniels X-Force and Spawn issues when they came out… which predated this.
The one’s I can remember were a two-part x-force story about Feral getting arrested for murdering her step-father, and the Spawn story which introduced Tiffany, the bad-ass angel who isn’t Angela.
In fact, I think I picked up the Spawn issue because of the art – it had super flashy computer colouring effects I hadn’t seen before.

THE TINY WAISTED, GRAVITY DEFYING GALS HE DRAWS ARE IN A PART MANGA, PART CARTOON STYLE THAT EMPHASIZES THE POWER, AND YES SEXY, QUALITY OF THE CHARACTERS. SO WHAT?

It aimed low and yet still did it poorly?

By: CW

CW — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 17:41:53 +0000

Is that post by Steve a parody? Because if it was it was hallarious. And if it wasn’t, that was hallarious!

The utter lack of editing on the book is unforgivable. If you’re paying good money for a comic like this, even with all the artistic “quirks” and lack of coherent “story”, at least you should expect some level professionalism. Like running a spell check, maybe. I mean, if you’re going to drop a turd, at least humor us by polishing it up.

By: STEVE DOWNS

STEVE DOWNS — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 12:23:42 +0000

IT’S OBVIOUS YOU JUST DON’T GET IT!
A) THIS IS AN OVER THE TOP COMIC, NOT LIT CLASS ESSAY. LOTS OF COMIC FANS ENJOY “PURE ESCAPIST” ART AND WRITING. BEAU SMITH IS A MASTER OF THIS GENRE OF PURE FUN COMIC WRITING, SATIRE AND HUMOR THAT YOU OBVIOUSLY MISS OUT ON.
B) TONY DANIELS IS ONE OF THE BEST CARTOONIST, ARTISTS IN THE BIZ…THE TINY WAISTED, GRAVITY DEFYING GALS HE DRAWS ARE IN A PART MANGA, PART CARTOON STYLE THAT EMPHASIZES THE POWER, AND YES SEXY, QUALITY OF THE CHARACTERS. SO WHAT?

WHY IS IT THAT GUYS LIKE YOU GET TO SIT AROUND AND TEAR APART OTHER PEOPLES EFFORTS? IS IT BECAUSE YOU HAVE A LOT OF TIME ON YOUR HANDS CREATING NOTHING? I GUESS.

By: LouReedRichards

LouReedRichards — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 04:18:15 +0000

I couldn’t agree less with sgt pepper.

I like knowing that creators actually take time to peruse the boards and care about comics in a lot of the same ways that we fans do.

Thanks for keeping it classy guys, wow, for once I mean that in an un-ironic fashion.

By: Andrew Collins

Andrew Collins — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 02:51:49 +0000

That’s very classy of Beau Smith to pop in and offer up his comments, even if the review wasn’t very flattering.

But I agree with the above poster who said he doesn’t miss the 90′s. I love comics up until about 1992 and have been enjoying them more the last 4-5 years, but with a few exceptions (Preacher, Hitman, Spectre, and Sandman Mystery Theatre come quickly to mind…I’m sure there are a few others I’m forgetting…) there was a very big “dead zone” of about 10 years there where so much of what was being produced, especially by Marvel, DC, and Image, was sooo bad. I attribute it to the weird obsession of trying to copy the artistic aesthetics of Rob Liefeld and Jim Lee across the board while marginalizing the importance of actually telling a good story. So much flash, so little substance…

By: Ben Herman

Ben Herman — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 02:11:36 +0000

Wow… that sounds like a really bad comic book. Well, okay, maybe not bad per say, but cheesy as all hell, like some kind of exploitation B-movie that goes directly to DVD or late night cable. This series might almost be worth getting because it sounds so bad that it’s good. Not that I’d ever pay full price for any of the issues. But if I ever saw these in a fifty cent bin at a convention, and I was in the mood for some grade-A cheese, maybe I’d pick them up. Maybe.

I will say this… generally I enjoy Beau Smith’s writing. It’s fun and pulpy and has high-octane action. If this is a bad series, I expect that is due to Smith working with a concept initially created by Tony Daniel. I expect Smith did the best he could with what he was given. Who knows how much worse this would have been if Daniel had done it all on his own!

By: agent_torpor

agent_torpor — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 02:08:09 +0000

This looks freaking AWESOME.

By: jazzbo

jazzbo — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 23:13:10 +0000

Yep, I’m with bad_trotsky. I always think it’s cool when the creators of a book pop up in the comment section. Or just comic creators in general, even if it’s a post about a book other than their own.

By: bad_trotsky

bad_trotsky — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 20:05:14 +0000

sgt. pepper you are very wrong. It makes my day when a creator shows up here and the polite discourse between the reviewer and the writer just put a smile on my face.

By: sgt pepper

sgt pepper — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 19:29:46 +0000

I’ve said it before, but the internet is a lot less fun when the actual creators show up, and I wish they’d stop. Blogs and message boards are just fans bullshitting for fun. If we wanted your opinions, we’d write emails directly to you or post on your personal blogs. Otherwise, unless you’re here strictly in the capacity of a fan, leave us alone to make fun of or criticize or praise your comics in whatever manner we choose.

By: Daniel O' Dreams

Daniel O' Dreams — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 18:52:24 +0000

The cat must be magic or something right? Why else would you bring it into battle (or at least to rescue someone which she thought she was doing). You gotta admit the villain defeated by cat piss IS pretty funny.

By: Sijo

Sijo — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 16:07:02 +0000

@ Michael: I agree with your assessment of this book’s characteristics- however, I’m sure it was intentional. and can you really fault people for aping what is “hot” at the time? It may be unoriginal but hey, comics are supposed to *sell* first. Its artistic merits, if any, come later.

As for the bok itself, if Mr. Smith had been trying to create, say, the next MARVELS, then you could call it a failure, but as it is, I think it delivered exactly what it promised, so even though I don’t particularly care for it, I wouldn’t call it the worst comic ever either. And some people obviously DID like it. I remember seeing cartoons that I loved as a kid and that make me go “ugh” right now, but the point is, they ENTERTAINED me back then. So, Mr. Smith, feel no shame over this. You did that then, you do different now. It’s the way of things.

Oh, btw nice handling of the situation to Smith and Burkas. Now if only everyone on the Net was this mature.

By: Michael

Michael — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 14:27:47 +0000

To my mind, one of the most damning things about this book is how indistinguishable it is from so many other comics of the period. 1997 or thereabouts seemed to suffer a plague of quasi-mystical T&A books (no doubt a result of the inexplicable success of Witchblade), and they were all exactly like this: Vague, stock characters, preoccupation with a dull “mythology” mostly cribbed from bad movies and video games, no hint whatsoever of any kind of theme or ethos beyond “Woo! Tits and explosions!” and art that ranged from insipid to incomprehensible to insulting. It’s almost hard to believe that books like Bone, Strangers in Paradise, and Starman were being published at the same time.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 12:46:18 +0000

I’m not sure artists’ stylistic quirks are fair game.

Is it that different from attacking Quitely for his characters’ puffy lips, or Mignola for his characters’ blocky legs, or Kiby for his charcaters’ square hands.

By: jazzbo

jazzbo — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 09:04:55 +0000

Civil discourse between a comic book writer and a reviewer over a negative review of the writer’s work? C’mon people, this is the internet! That’s not how these things work. Don’t you know the rules?