Jim Shooter's Blog, page 9

October 13, 2011

Marvel's 25th Anniversary in Variety

[image error] JayJay here. Jim is otherwise occupied today so I thought I would come up with something to fill in and also spotlight what one of our readers, the wonderful JediJones, has accomplished... He has compiled a list of Jim's work that is available on Amazon. We appreciate all the trouble he went to!

JediJones comments:
I just compiled a list of links of Jim's trade paperbacks available on Amazon. I inserted Jim's affiliate link code so he should get full referral fees if you buy through these links.

Jim, Amazon also has this bibliography page with a form for you to make updates to it. It's missing most of your titles so you might want to update it and then you can link to it here. It might also be worth posting direct graphic links here to the pre-orders for the new Secret Wars I and II trade paperbacks. (Thanks! I will work on that!--JJ)

[image error]

Jim has promised to tell the story of working with George Romero on Mongrel soon!

View more on Jim Shooter's website »

Like • 0 comments • flag

Published on October 13, 2011 09:31

October 12, 2011

The Secret Origin of The Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe – Part 3

Issue # 15 of a 12-Issue Limited Series and Other Tales to Astonish
Just as I stayed out of Larry Hama's way on G.I. JOE, and stayed out of Archie Goodwin's way on EPIC Illustrated and EPIC Comics, I pretty much left Mark Gruenwald alone and let him do his thing on The Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe. The series wasn't what I had envisioned or what I would have done, but that was okay with me.
If an editor or a creator knew the fundamentals, had an approach that seemed reasonable and had the chops to pull it off, well, all righty then. It was never my goal to Shooter-ize everything. I just wanted to make good comics, and I realized there were many ways to go to get to that goal.
(ASIDE: For instance, Editors in Chief before me had always taken personal charge of designing the covers and writing the cover copy. It seemed to me inevitable that a sameness to the covers would creep in after a while. I'm not talking about a consistent "Marvel feel" or even a house style—I mean staleness—"oh, that again" syndrome. Didn't matter who the EIC was, or how talented. The covers Len Wein created under his own administration as well as those he created as freelance cover editor for Marv, in my opinion, fell into a rut, to a certain extent. Too many covers featuring two big figures duking it out. To much similar copy: "Can you guess the shocking secret of…?" "This one has it all" "Not even your (enchanted hammer or whatever) can stop Name of Villain!" Archie Goodwin's covers, too, fell into a certain pattern.
As soon as I became reasonably confident that an editor had a clue about cover design, I butted out and left the covers up to him or her. Even if some weren't as good as I would have liked, or as good as I would have done, better to have more variety, I thought.)
Some of you commented that Gruenwald used too much copy, put in too much backstory, or too much information. Some didn't like the way he standardized the main figures, or the fact that he had Joe Rubinstein ink them all.
I'd like to point out that the Handbook was a monumental undertaking. Having a standardized format and one inker eased the incredible degree of difficulty somewhat. Also, I think Gruenwald was letting his personal inner fan come out a little, doing it the way he, when he was a reader rather than an editor, would have liked it.
Like I said, not exactly what I would have done…
…but the results were undeniably great. A lot of people apparently shared Gruenwald's tastes. Sales were terrific and stayed at the same high levels throughout the project.
So good, in fact, that when he wanted to add three issues to his 12-issue Limited Series, how could I deny him? If I had, it would have meant sales and finance people coming to my door with torches and pitchforks. Besides, issue #15 of a 12-issue Limited Series seemed so…Marvel.
One other detail to mention: I originally thought we'd be able to use previously published panels to illustrate the characters using their powers. Nah. In ancient days, Kirby, Ditko, Ayers and others routinely did power-establishing panels—use of the power and its effect in the same panel. Here are a few of my favorites, two from early issues of the Avengers, one from Spider-Man:

These days, they'd make the above a double page spread and still crop the figures. And shoot it from an indecipherable angle.

After the ancient guys, you couldn't find any such panels! Cropped figures. Action in one panel, result in the next. Poor angles. Unclear. Weak. Made me appreciate the Old Masters even more. It also meant that Gruenwald had to have a lot more new art done than originally contemplated, which added to his burden. Which he handled without complaint, except for demanding another cork board in his office.
Anyway….
I think the Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe was great, and stands forever as a testament to the talent and hard work of one of our best, Mark Gruenwald. He is sorely missed.
________________________

I found these items, a memo from Gruenwald about the deluxe edition that is illuminating, and two documents that offer a peek backstage peek:

[image error] [image error]

Note that this copy was made after the manufacturing estimate but before full approval.
While we're playing show and tell, here are a few other items of interest related to things mentioned or discussed recently:

Finally, I believe this was the actress who played Mary Jane for the Spider-Man wedding.

NEXT: ULTIMATE COMICS – All-New Spider-Man #1 Dissected and Analyzed

View more on Jim Shooter's website »

Like • 0 comments • flag

Published on October 12, 2011 12:37

October 11, 2011

The Secret Origin of the Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe – Part 2

First This
My sincere apologies. This post was supposed to be yesterday's. Yesterday's was supposed to be Saturday's. Prepping for the New York Comic-Con and some of the business I hope to accomplish there ate up a lot of time. Sorry.

Jane's Fighting Ships , the Marvel Encyclopedia and Where It Went From There
Wikipedia, of course, has the origin of the Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe wrong. Wikipedia is great if you're looking up fusion reactors or the Fort Ancient Culture but generally full of errors if you look up comic book things, especially any related to me.
In early 1982, I was in the Barnes & Noble on Fifth Avenue and I came across this very cool book, Jane's Fighting Ships. Every page or so had a clear picture of a warship plus its specifications and key information.
Wow. Nifty-keen!
There were other, similar books, too, notably Jane's All the World's Aircraft.
Extra groovy!
The succinct, info-packed pages of those books reminded me of the Night Girl "dossier" that I'd failed to get into a Legion of Super-Heroes issue some six years earlier. The little light bulb went on—why not publish a book like those featuring Marvel characters?

The next day at work, I sat down with Mark Gruenwald—as natural a choice for such a project as Larry Hama was for G.I. Joe—and told him my idea.
Gruenwald had already been thinking about pitching an encyclopedia of everything in the Marvel Universe to me.
I thought my idea was better. Simpler. Cleaner. More commercial. A definitive, glamor shot of each significant character, a panel excerpted from existing pages that showed them using their powers, and their stats—basic, dossier-type info plus how strong, how fast, etc. He was interested, make that thrilled, to do it my way (if he had to) but wouldn't it be better to…?
No.
I just figured that an encyclopedia that included everything would become a ponderous tome with too much trivia and inconsequential stuff to wade through.
I wrote up a new project memo for what I called The Marvel Super-Specifications Handbook and walked it through the vetting process—circulation, financial, legal….
Circulation and finance weren't very enthusiastic about the idea, but at that point, because we were on a roll and the books were selling, the vetters usually just shrugged and went along with whatever I proposed.
Usually. But Alice Donenfeld, our V.P. of Business Affairs and in-house counsel objected.
Alice! Alice, who alone among the upstairs types knew the comics, read the comics and saw in a heartbeat the potential of the idea, said no.
Seems that at some point, before I became Editor in Chief or possibly even before I started working at Marvel in 1976, the licensing department had licensed the rights to publish a "Marvel Encyclopedia" to one George Olshevsky.
I argued that my Super-Specifications Handbook wasn't quite the same thing.
Too close, said she.
I also argued that it seemed unlikely to me that someone not on staff and on premises could possibly create a Marvel Encyclopedia that accurately represented the Marvel Universe.
Alice stood her ground. And she was right. Sigh.
I suggested that we ask Olshevsky if he'd be willing to cancel his license in return for something else. In that case, Alice said, it would be okay.
It turned out that Olshevsky wasn't wed to the encyclopedia idea. He hadn't done anything with the rights, anyway. What he really liked to do was indexes. He'd previously done indexes of Marvel publications under license, some of which were published by Pacific Comics. We made him an offer to do "official" indexes to be published through Marvel on much better terms for him, and that did the trick.
So, the Super-Specifications project was approved and Gruenwald started work.
Nobody liked my "Super-Specifications" title, so we cast about for a new one. At the same time, Al Milgrom was working on developing a book that would feature one-shot stories by outstanding creators, working title Marvel Universe.
The Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe, the title proposed by Gruenwald, I think, seemed perfect for the series, so I pried the words "Marvel Universe" away from Milgrom. As I recall, he wasn't all that bothered by having to come up with a new title for his book, which ended up being called Marvel Fanfare as in "Ta-daa," fare for fans! Editori-Al is a sucker for puniness, so that worked.

The first issue of The Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe was released in late 1982, cover dated January 1983.
Gruenwald had drifted away from my specifications concept and more toward his original encyclopedia idea (and continued drifting that direction throughout the life of the Handbook series), but I was okay with that. The book looked good. And it sold gangbusters. Readers not working at 387 Park Avenue South loved it. Me too.

DC came out with their answer, Who's Who in the DC Universe two years later, though some there stubbornly claimed that DC had thought of it first. Right, and the Russians invented baseball.
P.S. Neither company invented the idea, obviously. Somebody was probably doing such things even before Jane's, and they started in 1898.

NEXT: Issue # 15 of a 12-Issue Limited Series and Other Tales to Astonish

View more on Jim Shooter's website »

Like • 0 comments • flag

Published on October 11, 2011 09:00

October 10, 2011

The Dead Can't Pay the Paperboy

First This

You probably noticed the Contributions request in the sidebar. I was reluctant to ask you for money, but economic reality has a way of asserting itself. To those of you who have already generously donated to help us keep going, thank you. To all who participate in this wonderfully collaborative blog, thank you. Together, I think we're building something really special here, a tapestry of views and opinions from different perspectives. To everyone who stops by, thank you. All of you make a difference.

Who Can Explain It, Who Can Tell You Why…?
This is the introductory paragraph of the series overview I wrote for Dark Horse's prospective re-launch of the Gold Key title Spektor (formerly Doctor Spektor) that, sadly, never made it to print.

"Have you ever met anyone who, at some time in his or her life, hasn't experienced something inexplicable? Knowing the phone was going to ring a second before it did? A premonition that proved true? A horoscope that was uncannily accurate? Next time you're at a party, ask if anyone has a "ghost story," a tale of something spooky that happened to them. Almost everyone does.

"I have several "ghost stories," and I'm the second most skeptical man on Earth."

If you're wondering, the most skeptical man on Earth, at the beginning, at least, was going to be Spektor.
When I see him, I'll ask Mike Richardson if I can post the overview and first Spektor plot I wrote. I don't see why not….
That introductory paragraph is me talking, for real. I don't believe in ghosts or in anything the existence of which has not been proven to my satisfaction.
However, things happen everywhere every day that defy explanation. I have had many minor, eyebrow-raising, inexplicable experiences—knowing the phone was about to ring, déjà vu, "prophetic" dreams, uncannily accurate how-the-hell-did-he/she-know-that readings? Etc. You know. I suspect that everyone reading this has had at least one of those.
Until someone figures out a watertight explanation for such occurrences, to a certain extent, anyone's explanation is as good as anyone else's. The Wiccans will say it's witchcraft, or the energies pervading nature or whatever, the E.S.P. fans will say it's undiscovered mental abilities, the flying saucer people will say it's the work of extraterrestrials…you know. I think we can rule out the theories of the people who think they're mutants because sometimes a street light will go out as they approach.
But don't think I'm making fun of Wiccans and other people who believe what they believe. I know a woman who's a whole lot smarter than me, a Fulbright scholar, who firmly believes in natural forces yet unidentified by science. I'm not sure if she calls herself a Wiccan, but I have heard her refer to herself as a "hedge witch."
Anyway….
This is October. A good time to ponder things beyond the world mundane.
I have a few ghost stories….
Some of you have made it clear that you don't want me straying off of the subject of comics, so I will confine these tales to extra weekend posts.
And I invite you to share here any ghost stories or tales of spooky or inexplicable events that you might have. Please. Enter them freely, and of your own will.

I Ain't Afraid of No Ghost…
…but I was, almost forty-nine years ago.
I was eleven. I was a paperboy. I delivered the morning paper, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette in the neighborhood where I lived and those close around in Bethel Park, Pennsylvania. Six days a week, at about five AM, I would set out on my route with as much as sixty pounds of papers in a canvas bag slung over my shoulder, down Thornwood Drive then up and down the hills all around. The Post-Gazette didn't have a Sunday edition. Thank God.
Every house had its delivery preference—inside the screen/storm door (depending on the season), on the porch, through the mail slot, in the milk box…. Remember milk boxes? I didn't think so.
On Saturday afternoons, I'd walk the route house to house collecting. Six days of the Post-Gazette cost 42 cents. Most people gave me fifty cents. Keep the change, kid. I envied the Pittsburgh Press paperboy who had approximately the same route, delivered after school and, since the Press had a Sunday edition and a week's worth was seventy-five cents, most people gave him a dollar. A twenty-five cent tip! Jeez, Louise!
October 27, 1962 , was a classic, bleak fall day. Windy. High overcast, with lower level clouds scudding by. Most of the leaves were off the trees and they bowed and rustled when gusts swept by. A gray, foreboding day.
The house on the corner of Elderwood and Chessbriar was surrounded by a high hedge. There were big, bare, wind-scourged trees in the yard. I wish I could tell you that there was a wrought iron fence with a creaky gate, but, nope. Just a flagstone walkway leading up to the porch.
I had never seen the people who lived there. At every other house, I'd knock on the door, someone would answer and give me my forty-two cents and sometimes throw in an extra eight cents for the effort. Sometimes not. When I came collecting at the corner house, though, there was always an envelope taped to the door with exactly forty-two cents inside.
But not that Saturday. And not the two Saturdays before, either. No envelope.
I'd been faithfully delivering the papers anyway. They'd pile up for a few days, then they'd be gone. Then they'd pile up for a while again, then they'd be gone again.
Looked like the grass hadn't been cut for a long time.
The first two no-envelope Saturdays I figured the people who lived there were away or something. By the third time I was starting to wonder. I had to pay for those papers whether or not I got paid.
I knocked on the door. No answer. I knocked louder. I wanted my $1.26, darn it!
I was about to give up. Then the door opened. It was an old lady—you know, old like a teacher or someone. Probably more than thirty! Like my mother.
She was wearing what in those days was called a housedress. Plain, ordinary clothes. She looked a little confused, like she couldn't quite grasp the situation—a paperboy wanting to collect. A kid, coin changer clipped to the belt. Receipt deck with binder rings in hand. Hello-o?
I demanded $1.26. She looked troubled and confused. She said she didn't have any money, but maybe she could find some.
What?
She asked me to come inside while she looked for money.
I came inside, as requested. In those days, if an adult asked you to do something, well…he or she was an adult, so….
The place was largely empty. As if a lot of stuff had been moved out. There were a few odd pieces of furniture, some taped-up boxes and some piles of stuff apparently in the process of being sorted.
The lady poked around, opening a drawer here and there, looking under little piles of papers and small items. Didn't seem likely to me that she'd find $1.26 anywhere she was looking.
I started thinking maybe I should just go. And said so. Told her I'd come back later. I was getting that hair-standing-up-on-the-back-of-the-neck creepy feeling….
No! she said. She asked me to follow her to the kitchen. Maybe there was some money there.
Numbly, I followed.
Sit down, she said, pulling out a chair at the kitchen table for me. Okay….
She looked in the refrigerator. For money?
There was nothing in the fridge except for one bottle of Coke. She was delighted. She offered it to me. I said no, thank you, but she insisted. There was a bottle opener mounted on the side of a cabinet. She opened the Coke and put it in front of me.
Then she sat down and started asking me questions. Where did I go to school? What grade was I in?
Memorial School, just up Elderwood and over the hill. Sixth.
She wanted to hear all about it. Did I have friends? What were they like? What did we do? Did I like school?
I started feeling very…what's a good word? Uneasy? No, I'd felt uneasy since the door opened. Okay, default to comic-book-speak. I felt a nameless dread. I was scared.
She pressed me about what it was like, my life. Looking back from this distance, granted, in nameless-dread, comic-booky terminology, what it was like to be alive.
Suddenly, a feeling of terror overwhelmed me. I said something like, "I have to go." And I ran out of that house as fast as my scrawny legs would carry me.
I ran all the way home.
I didn't deliver papers to the house at the corner of Elderwood and Chessbriar that week. Steered clear of it.
The next Saturday, I went collecting again. Skipped that house.
The next door neighbors were customers. I knocked on their door and Mrs. M., answered. As I was giving her fifty cents change for her dollar, I asked her what was up with the lady next door. I told her that I came to collect from her a week ago but she couldn't find any money.
Mrs. M. looked puzzled. She told me that the lady who lived next door had died a month ago, and insisted that no one had been in that house since, except her brother once or twice, packing things up.
True story. I swear.
Now, I can hear you thinking, coming up with various explanations. I've done that, too. Surely there is a rational explanation—a sister or cousin who came by to help pack. Whatever.
But I was scared out of my mind. Nameless dread. A kind of terror piercing to the soul that defies description.
Anyway….

NEXT WEEKEND: My Girlfriend's Dead Aunt Comes to Call
Again, please, if anyone has any tales to tell, please do so.
Berni Wrightson, or Bernie Wrightson, as he now prefers, told me about a weird event that happened to him that makes the few tales I have seem paltry. I'll see if I can get him to tell the tale. Joe Jusko, I know you're in touch with the estimable Mr. Wrightson, and I know you stop by here sometimes, so rattle his cage for me, please, if you will.
And if you have one or more….
Anyone else with knowledge of comics guys I can bug for a tale, please rat them out.
Thanks.

MONDAY: Jane's Fighting Ships , the Marvel Encyclopedia and Where It Went From There

View more on Jim Shooter's website »

Like • 0 comments • flag

Published on October 10, 2011 08:42

October 8, 2011

Panel at the New York Comic Con Sunday

Jim will be on a panel at the New york Comic Con this weekend.

Screen Future: Gaming, Comics and TV Around the World and Five Years From Now

Date: Sunday, October 16
12:00 pm - 1:00 pm

Location: 1A15

Speakers: Brian David Johnson, Craig Engler, Jim Shooter

Description:
Join moderator Brian David Johnson, Intel Futurist and author of "Screen Future," along with industry luminaries Craig Engler (senior executive, Syfy channel) and Jim Shooter (legendary creator, Dark Horse Comics), as they discuss the digital future of entertainment. The conversation spans Bollywood to the comic con show floor regarding how and what digital entertainment you'll likely be enjoying five years from now. Learn about how people, technology, and economics are shaping the evolution of entertainment and smart TV. Expand your knowledge of the technology influencing our rapidly changing world.

View more on Jim Shooter's website »

Like • 0 comments • flag

Published on October 08, 2011 10:39

October 7, 2011

New 52 General Conclusions and the Secret Origin of the Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe

New 52 General Conclusions
About timeline logic in the New 52 "universe," Greygor said this:

Greygor commented on "DC Comics the New 52 – Part 2":

The thing that's confusing me in the Bat line is that Bruce Wayne has been Batman, he's disappeared and Dick Grayson has taken the role. He's now back to being Batman again.

In addition there have been 3 Robins, Grayson, Todd and now Damien (IIRC based on what I read in Batman #1, Detective #1 & Batman & Robin #1).

The #1's are set 5 years after the appearance of Superman, Earth's first superhero. So all the above happened in a 5 year period.
It's not tracking for me.

(…)

Posted by Greygor to Jim Shooter at October 6, 2011 4:46 AM

Independently, techberry made an observation regarding inconsistent characters:

techberry commented on "DC Comics the New 52 – Part 3":

This particular issue you reviewed highlights a lack of consistency that is rampant within The New 52 reboot.

You showed us a panel of Bruce Wayne surrounded by his 'Robins'; Dick Grayson, Jason Todd and Damian Wayne.

It drives me 'batty' that as a reader of many titles, I am supposed to accept that the prepubescent Dick Grayson shown in this panel is the same young "man" currently showcased in the Nightwing comic? Not buying it.

That the cherub of a lad Jason Todd shown here also the same Jason Todd shooting his way through Red Hood and the Outlaws? Not making that connection.

Only Damian seemed to fit his approximate age...

How hard is it to get these guys in a room and say, these are the characters, this is who they are, what they look like, and how they act. Nightwing as he is depicted in THIS book will be Nightwing as he is depicted in THAT book. And so on.

Also, the 'consistency' of Batman between different titles is all over the place. I have a hard time keeping him character because each title has its own vision of who he is...

(…)

Posted by techberry to Jim Shooter at October 6, 2011 10:42 PM

None of the New 52 books I read were origin stories. None of them offered much if any explanation about the status quo they presented. By design, apparently.
bmcmolo clued me in:

bmcmolo commented on "DC Comics the New 52 – Part 2":

(…)

Dear Jim - Not that it's a particularly satisfying answer, but Dan DiDio's intent with the "don't bother filling in the backstory/ how people know each other, etc." thing was, according to him, to allow room for later creators to fill in whatever they see fit. Like I said, I don't think it's particularly satisfying or sensible, but that's his raison d'être for the lack of establishing captions/ backstory/ sketched-out causal connections, re-booting to five years in, etc.

Posted by bmcmolo to Jim Shooter at October 5, 2011 1:07 PM

All righty, then….
Great idea for a "precise entry point." Start in the middle, explain nothing.
Why? Because the DC brain trust believes that we, the "existing readers" don't care? Or, because they feel sure they've got us no matter what, and that the "new readers" they hope to attract don't care? Or, because no one at DC cares? Or, because it's too hard to think it all through and figure things out?
Continuity and consistency take a great deal of work. My most recent experience working at DC Comics is three years out of date, but DC Comics is still a DiDiocracy, it would appear. The DiDiots rise to the top, and no one wants to work too hard.
If this "initiative" bogs down or fails, well, so what? DC gets a substantial sales spike and goes along better than before, at least for a while. DiDio, Lee, Harras, Johns and the rest keep their phoney-baloney jobs, collect fat paychecks and big bonuses a little longer.
And in a couple of years, when things get hopelessly tangled up again and sales slide, no problem. Do a new New 52. Do it till it's as worn out as the ol' Crisis trick.

DC is like Lucy and we're like Charlie Brown. DC keeps yanking the football away and we keep yelling Aaugh! and landing hard. They're very sure we'll keep coming back and try to kick the ball again. And, knowing some of the perps fairly well, I can assure you they're pretty smug about it.
So far, they're right.

Diane Nelson, are you really on board with this "strategy?"
I had high hopes for you.
The Lucy strategy will work until Marvel or some emerging contender does it the right way. Starts with a powerful concept, a creative vision. Puts in the work and the effort. Thinks it through. Produces good stories, well told. Builds something meaningful that fires peoples' imaginations and invites them in the way, oh, say, Harry Potter did.
Lucky for your "brain trust" that Marvel is almost as rudderless. It will probably take a market/distribution paradigm shift that opens new opportunities for a new player to arise, either an upstart or a deep-pocketed entertainment industry contender.
Not bloody likely soon. DC can probably pull off two or three more New 52's before any threats emerge.
On the other hand, there seemed to be no credible threats to DC on the horizon in 1961….
If and when a threat does emerge, the DC DiDiocracy and the old Lucy trick are going to seem as tired, pathetic and dated as DC Comics did in the sixties, when Marvel arose to take the lead.
There are some entertaining books among the New 52 and some with good things about them. There are many talented people among the creators working on the New 52, some trained and skilled, some less so.
Churchill said, "No one can guarantee success in war, but only deserve it." That works for comics and most other endeavors, too. I hope success comes to the New 52 and creators thereof who deserve it.

The Secret Origin of the Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe – Part 1
It started here:

I wrote an eight-page second feature for that issue starring Shadow Lass and Night Girl entitled "Death Stroke at Dawn." The issue came out in July 1975.
Shadow Lass, for you non-Legion-o-philes, "nullifies light," that is, makes it dark. Night Girl is a wannabe Legionnaire who didn't make the cut. She's super-strong, but only at night or in darkness.
A super heroine who can be de-powered by flipping on a light switch is not ready for prime time.
In the course of the story, however, it occurs to Shadow Lass that the two of them working together could be dangerous. If Shady made it dark, Nighty could kick ass…. They both can see in the dark. Why not?
I wrote a scene in which Shadow Lass pulls up Night Girl's dossier, kept on file by the Legion to check whether her power's limitation was the only reason Nighty was rejected. I called for the dossier to appear on a large screen so we could all have a good look at it over Shady's shoulder.
On the dossier we see what you'd expect—height, weight, planet of origin, etc. But we also see some futuristic data—courage quotient, reaction index, power level rating….
Editor Murray Boltinoff objected. He said that a dossier was as dull as a "railroad timetable." It would remind kids of school. They'd hate it. He wanted the scene cut.
As it happened, Murray had originally commissioned the story as a ten-pager, then discovered (after I'd written it) that he'd miscounted and there was only room for an eight pager in that issue. I had to cut two pages of story. If you're wondering whether I got paid for the extra work, the answer is no.
Toward the end of his career, Murray often had trouble keeping page counts and other things straight. But that's a tale for another time.
Anyway, I cut two pages, including the dossier scene Murray loathed. But I loved the idea and kept it in mind.
Many years later, back at DC writing the Legion of Super-Heroes again, different editor, I finally got to use the idea, in this issue, on sale in October 2008:

Not quite the presentation I'd hoped for, but….
The script is posted for download, if you'd care to have a look. It's got some fun stuff in it.
Somewhere in the middle, while I was Editor in Chief of Marvel, I brought up the dossier idea again. It grew like Topsy. It was an amazing evolution. Tell you all about it Monday.

SATURDAY: The Dead Can't Pay the Paperboy
MONDAY: Jane's Fighting Ships , The Marvel Encyclopedia and Where It Went From There

View more on Jim Shooter's website »

Like • 0 comments • flag

Published on October 07, 2011 11:39

October 6, 2011

DC Comics the New 52 – Part 3

The first two of the New 52 I reviewed, Red Hood and the Outlaws #1 and Catwoman #1 were suggested by JayJay, because they were generating the most discussion online.
I tried to confine my analysis to Comics 101 basics, how the efforts compared to DC's stated goals and how well each succeeded at what, in particular, they seemed to be trying to do. A lot of the discussion about those books both here and elsewhere online seems to be about the depiction and behavior of the female characters. I didn't weigh in there. To me, that's an evaluation each reader has to make for him or herself, not one I am more qualified than any other individual to pontificate about. One person's Good Girl Art is another person's "demeaning to women." Etc.
The publisher has the right to publish any non-actionable material it wishes. Then we get to pick. The DC brass apparently thought the content of the two books I reviewed served their goals or would appeal to a large enough segment of the market to be worth doing. Whatever.
For many reasons having nothing to do with the controversies over the depiction and behavior of the female characters, I found a lot wrong with Red Hood and Catwoman.
But, let it be known, personally, I didn't like the way the female characters were portrayed. It's not that I think that there is anything, any situation or any type of character, male or female, that cannot be done if it is done with rare excellence and surpassing skill. The problem is that, too often, comic book writers and artists who belong in creator kindergarten think they're already Ph.D's.
Anyway….
My thanks to those of you who suggested better New 52 efforts to check out. That narrowed the search a lot. Some of the ones I didn't pick had merit, but I went with one of the characters I loved when I was a kid.

Batman #1
The cover:
First Version: The logo is too clever by half. The texture on the stylized Batman symbol serves no purpose. What's it there for? It's distracting and adds nothing. I believe that it's Photoshop masturbation. The good news is that you can do wonderful things with images these days. The bad news is that artists do things because they can, and for no other reason.
The Batman symbol is all but lost against the battleship camouflage background anyway. The halo around it helps a little. Not enough.
Even though the background varies in value, the yellow-white letters spelling out Batman pop, because they're very light and bright and the background, including the Batman symbol, is dark enough. The problem is that the letters themselves are harder to read than they have to be. Yes, you can pretty quickly understand what they're spelling out here, but what's going to happen when some element overlaps the logo?
As for the image, it too, is a little harder to "read" than it has to be. Okay, I see Batman, and he's surrounded by figures. But, honestly, it took a few seconds of staring to realize that Batman is being swarmed by these figures. It was when I focused on the figure on the left who's lunging at Batman—the one bearing Greg Capullo's signature—and also noticed the figure below him holding onto Batman's leg that I grokked.
Bad choice for a place to sign, Greg. Intrusive. Distracting.
We see mainly the tops of the heads of four of the figures, including the scaly guy foreground. My God, I just sorted out that one of the odd shapes I see is actually Batman's left leg. He's shoving away the guy with the question mark hairdo with his foot.
P.S., it took me a few seconds to realize that was a question mark. Aha! So, comics-savvy me has a sudden revelation…! He must be the Riddler! I start trying to pick out details amid the tangle of gray shapes that might give me a clue who the others are.
Suddenly, it hits me—that big, black shape that stretches up to the top of the cover is Batman's cape! I guess it has holes in it…or is that dirt and smoke in front of the part close to his body, or…?
I have a couple of words for you Greg Capullo: Silhouette and dynamics. Also, the term Tipped Line of Balance. Give your characters discoverable indications of movement. Demonstrate the vector of the action. Like you did with the guy you signed.
Make it read. Make it work. Clear at a glance, unless there is a storytelling reason to be mysterious or obscure.
I met you at a con in Toronto, right? Long ago. Looks like you're doing all right for yourself. Good for you.
This is a very gray cover. I wonder what the fascination these days with gray comes from. I suppose, however, if you're going to have a gray cover, Batman is the right book.
This cover isn't terrible. Pretty good, actually. It's just not all that it could be.

Second version: Told you so. The logo is really hard to read, now. It's not as if it's a long established logo like Cosmopolitan, for instance, or GQ. See just a bit of those familiar logos and your brain fills in the rest automatically. This is a new logo.
Fortunately, we have a big, prominent figure of Batman front and center, which serves as a clue.
A big, misshapen figure. The arms don't look like they belong to, or are attached to the body. Batman is a handsome guy. This fellow isn't. The whole cover is jumbled, cluttered, confusing and unappealing. The obligatory variant. If you're going to prey upon those of us who like to have the complete set, DC, can't you at least make each variant good?

Third version: I actually like it better without color, though most of the same comments as before still apply.
The interior:

Splash page: Three moody shots featuring architecture, for the most part.
One thing the Batman filmmakers got right is that Gotham City is a co-star. Writer Scott Snyder and penciler Greg Capullo got it right, too.
The art and the copy are intriguing. Nice work, guys.
The page two-three spread is good. Striking. A throng of weird, nasty-looking types is obviously confronting Batman. If I don't think about it, and turn the page, it's cool.
But this is me we're dealing with….
The worm's eye POV is groovy. But it's framed, in part, by a black shape that gives me pause. The black shape—whoops, there's a little hint of gray (what else?) at the top—trails, it seems, onto the floor, so it's not the eyehole of a mask. Besides, if Batman were lying on the floor, why would the throng confronting him be looking up…? And left! Eureka! Batman is standing mostly off panel to the left, and the black thing…must be his cape!
God, I hope he doesn't trip on the damn thing.
There's an inset. Usually I don't like insets because usually they're idiotically placed. This one isn't covering anything important. It still confuses me a little. The pointy bit on top I read right away as Batman's nose, but I had trouble sorting out the mouth below it. I think the colorist did too.

Turn the page….
And there's Batman. Stylized, wearing a slightly different costume than I'm used to—but the movies and comics have mucked with the costume frequently, so what else is new. Besides, cape, cowl, bat symbol, gray and/or black…. It's Batman, all right.

A very good fight scene starts, during which, succinctly, elegantly, Snyder gives us a heads up about who these weird bad guys are. It's all we need to operate. Sweet.
Though he isn't named, I recognize Clayface, which makes me feel very smart and in the know. New Reader me wouldn't have known, but the fact that he's a gloppy, monstrous guy who seems to be made of mud would have been sufficient for me to accept that Batman can kick a hole in him, no worries.
The point is, I get the drift. A bunch of weird-to-bizarre criminals who are familiar to Batman are attacking him. If Batman is comfortable with that reality, so am I.
Page six starts with…what? I have no idea what I'm looking at in panel one.

Panel two, that seems to be Batman in a new locale. New Reader me had no clue where the last locale was, though savvy-me whispered "Arkham Asylum" in my own mind's ear.
I suss out that Batman was knocked or thrown through a window. Maybe. It could be that this is still an interior location. I don't know. What are those things with the chains? Prison bunks? Can this be a prison cell? It had a breakable glass window big enough for a man to be thrown through, though. Oh, I don't know.
Savvy me registers that there is a panel three, and that it's a close up of Batman's eyes. New Reader me misses it and doesn't miss it. It's just meaningless shapes….
Panel four, here come the bad guys.
Panel five, I don't know. Black page background, no gutters, black shapes running into each other…. I don't know what I'm looking at.
Don't you artists realize that when the shapes run together like that we, the readers, who don't have you around to explain it, first see all the shapes that run together as one big shape. Then we realize that can't be right. Then, thirty seconds into it, if we haven't thrown the damn book away, we finally grok that part of the big black shape is someone sneaking up on Batman, part of it is a cropped close up of Batman's head with a fingers pulling on one of his Bat-ears, and…wait! There are some squiggles back in the sneaking up part that could be the hair of the sneaker-upper!
Then, last panel on the page, which both underlies and overlaps its predecessors, which doesn't help, we get a look at the sneaker-upper. Due to the untimely death of Heath Ledger more New Reader/civilians have a shot at knowing it's the Joker than would otherwise.
Good. Otherwise, figuring out this page was hard work.
And so it goes. I'm going to stop criticizing the artistic idiocies, sorry, Greg, or you guys are going to think I don't like this book.
No, I love it.
So much of the art is so good that I spent the 30 seconds sorting out the big, black shape and didn't mind too much.

The artistic madness continues in spots here and there. But by and large, Greg delivers the story effectively and with excellence. Even when it's tricky, like when the E.M.P. mask is explained, or the remote computer connection to the Batcave is demonstrated.

And the writing? Snyder is good. His writing is clear, clean and compact. He's clever, in the best sense. Everything is explained elegantly in an unburdensome way. There is drama, intrigue, suspense. The action is well written.
Best of all, I recognize these people. Snyder seamlessly blends whatever new there is in the New 52 iteration of Batman with enough of what I already know and cherish. It's all good.

My theory of how to reinvent a character is this: Ask 1,000 people to tell you what they know about the character. If nearly all of them say, as they might in this case, Batcave, Batmobile, Robin, that butler guy…then make awful damn sure that you keep the Batcave, the Batmobile, Robin and Jarvis. Oops. Alfred.
Anything not mentioned by a substantial majority is fair game to muck around with. Ignore that weird guy who mentioned Bat-Mite.
After a while, once you get the hang of it, you don't need to ask anyone anymore.
Snyder rocks the house.
My only complaint is that this issue is just the first act. I wish there were more of the story. Not that I wish what is presented here was different. I wish the book was longer.
Clearly, Snyder knows the fundamental continued story techniques, which I will explain here soon, or he is welcome to.
I'm impressed.
So, two thumbs up with one small admonishment to you, Greg. When you finally home in all of your devastating firepower on the target, which is telling the story and telling it well, and stop occasionally succumbing to windage and firing useless rounds into artsy-fartsy land, you will be king.
Not the King. Only one of him. But king, indeed.

NEXT: New 52 General Conclusions and the Secret Origin of the Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe

View more on Jim Shooter's website »

Like • 0 comments • flag

Published on October 06, 2011 12:18

October 5, 2011

DC Comics the New 52 – Part 2

At the end of my last post, a review of Red Hood and the Outlaws #1, I blamed what I consider to be a pretty bad comic book on DC Comics and the writer, Scott Lobdell. My naming Lobdell as a culprit and not the artist, Kenneth Rocafort, stems from the notion stubbornly stuck in my head that what the artist drew reflects the writer's wishes. You'd think I'd be over that by now. It once was that way, long ago, but I know from personal, frustrating, recent experience that it seldom is these days. Sorry.
So, to be fair and balanced, after "…Scott Lobdell, get a grip," I should have added: "Kenneth Rocafort, learn to tell a story."

Catwoman #1
The cover:
Beautifully drawn. However, Catwoman seems to be floating above, rather than resting upon the ledge. She's totally detached from the background. The cast shadow under her doesn't seem to help much.
Because lower ledges of the building, some distance away, are colored the same shade of gray as ones closer to our POV, depth is lost. Even a few cars way down on the street are colored that same shade of gray. Little depth-killers.
The logo doesn't read as effortlessly as it should, because the "C" is a little "G"-like and the pink, cat-clawed "W" is mostly up against darker background elements and loses some pop.
In general, running a logo against a variegated background with light and dark values makes it hard to read. Painting them a variety of light and dark shapes was the way they camouflaged battleships, when there were battleships. A "battleship camouflage" background is a good way to obscure a logo, whether light or dark.
Despite all that, this logo works reasonably well. The halo around the letters helps.
Back to Catwoman herself. She's apparently comfortable in high, precarious places. She's languorously lolling. Maybe that sparkly white stuff coming out of the bag is super catnip.
So, what is the "hook" this cover offers? Curiosity about the catnip, I suppose. Intrigue inspired by her looking carelessly comfortable up high without a net. Wondering if she's high the other way….
Mainly though, I'd say it's cheesecake. Super cheesecake. If that's what DC is selling here, as with Red Hood and the Outlaws, I defend to the death their right to do so. If that's their plan, I'd say they did a pretty good job with this cover.
The interior:
Storytelling:
The artist, Guillem March, tells the story pretty well. Not the way I would have done it, and I have quibbles here and there, but I didn't have any serious trouble understanding.
March does some nice things with the body language and acting. On page five, for instance, panel three, I love Catwoman's pose, gesture, and the fact that she's not looking at her friend Lola, rather looking down as she ticks off the particulars of her situation. Very natural, very human.

I also like the fact that Lola has a distinctive face and physiotype. Not the cookie cutter comic book standard looks. Real-person looks.
For that matter, while Catwoman has the over-the-top "babe" body, her face isn't the standard babe-glyph. And, as he did in panel four of page four, March gives her human expressions.
This is great: In panel three on page eighteen, March uses a border to select a detail of his drawing, then does a matching inset showing a subtle change—Batman's grip has relaxed!

Wow. As one who demands a great deal of subtlety from artists and seldom gets any of it, I am impressed.
So…March conveys information pretty well.
Now about some of the information he chooses, or is instructed to convey….
The first time we see Catwoman's face is on page three. However, by then, we've seen close ups of her breasts barely contained by her delicate-looking-but-obviously-industrial-strength bra and her body, front and back, in action poses shot from angles chosen for display purposes. Oh by the way, when we finally see her head to toe, including face, she's still only halfway into her skin-tight cat-suit. More bra, one cup trying to hold a cup-and-a-half.

The cover accurately represented the contents, then. Cheesecake.
There are lots more examples, some shown below.

So, what else do we have here?
Violence. Blood.

And sex. With Batman. Don't worry, nothing X-rated is shown, because, as the title avers, "…and most of the costumes stay on…."

The art:
March draws well enough, I suppose, especially things he's especially interested in, like cheesecake and tight, shiny catsuits.
If he's going to draw this series, he should learn what a cat looks like. Those little three-toed critters he draws are not cats. He should also get ref on a cat carrier, or at least decide if the one he's drawing opens on top or at the ends.
The story:
I suppose that I should warn everyone that what follows is a mega-spoiler. Then again, can you really spoil a story if there is no story?
Writer Judd Winick gives us a series of incidents strung together. It's not a story. I suppose it might be the beginning of a story, like a bunch of Lego blocks dumped out on the table that might, with the addition of many more blocks, become a little cabin or something.
I have my doubts.
Selina Kyle/Catwoman is attacked in her apartment. Apparently, she saw it coming. She escapes the skull-faced intruders. They blow up her apartment.

I wonder if the neighbors sustained any collateral damage? Well, no one cares about that.
And Catwoman doesn't much care about having been attacked, or her attackers. Doesn't know who they are or exactly why they attacked her. No response required, apparently. They are not heard from or spoken of again.
Catwoman goes to her friend Lola for help. Lola, her "fence" and her "intel man." Fence? Catwoman is a thief?
Yes, I know that the original Catwoman, dating back to 1940, was a criminal, but this is the New 52, a partial do-over, so can we really take anything for granted?
Lola knows of an unoccupied luxury penthouse where Catwoman can "squat" for a two weeks and tells her where she might find information that she can use to make money. A "job."
Posing as a bartender at a Russian Mob soiree—rife with cheesecake, of course—Catwoman, who speaks Russian, learns of a painting worth a lot of money, but only to the mobsters. Why not steal it and sell it back to them…!
But, she sees a mobster, Renald, at the party who should be in prison. He's free?!
Renald brutally murdered a young woman for doing something that pissed him off. This is shown in a flashback.
Abandoning her post at the bar, Catwoman (still disguised as a bartender) follows Renald into the men's room, partially strips and approaches him seductively. Purple bra this time.

He buys it. Once she's in his arms, she takes him by surprise. Half-dressed, she wreaks bloody vengeance.
She's exposed in more ways than one.
The mobsters discover that the "bartender" is an infiltrator while she's still in the men's room. Fortunately, she has her Catwoman costume hidden above the suspended ceiling tiles…
…in the men's room?!
She changes into Catwoman and fights her way out through dozens of burly, heavily armed mobsters, doing them major, bloody damage en route.

Wait a minute. If she's able to easily rip through a dozen big thugs absolutely unscathed, why did she need to strip, pretend to come on to Renald and sneak-attack him? Why not just walk in and carve him up?
Oh, right. Cheesecake.
Speaking of which, Catwoman apparently has some kind of very sharp claws built into her gloves. However, when she carves up Renald, she does it with bare fingernails, which seem to be every bit as effective. Super fingernails?
Interesting that Catwoman was moved to seek vengeance for the young woman murdered by Renald but didn't even bother to check on neighbors who might have been killed when her apartment was blown up by skull-faces.
I acknowledge that there is a mystery hinted at regarding the murdered young woman. Maybe the reason for Catwoman's uncontainable, killing rage will emerge, who knows how many decompressed issues from now.
Back at her fabulous penthouse "squat," a pensive Catwoman sits among her pet kitties.
Batman enters. He knows her apartment was blown up. He's worried about her.
There is no introduction or explanation of Batman. We're supposed to know. Fair enough. I guess most people these days know who Batman is. Or do we? This is the New 52. Can we really take anything for granted?
Catwoman throws herself at him, kisses him. She wants sex. He says no.
No means no, right?
Nope. She persists. Tackles him, in fact. They struggle on the expensive carpet, her on top, going for the pin. So to speak. After some resistance, he "…gives in."
They have sex, shown as graphically, I suspect, as DC's "Teen +" rating allows.
That's the end, for this issue.
The collection of episodes presented here in issue #1 is pretty sparse. Very much decompressed. I make it sound like more happened than did.
Catwoman speaks to us through narrative captions, most of which are declarative: "I'm Selina Kyle, Catwoman." "This is Gotham City." "This is the Ivgene clan. Russian Mob."
Or expository: "I'm a good eight rooftops away before I bother to look back."
Some are her describing herself: "I'm not sure I like doing anything unless it puts me out on the limb. 'Cuz that's where the fruit is, right?" Her musings about herself tell us that she's a thrill-seeker who loves danger. Okay.
At least it's clearly her narration and there are no other narrators.
The dialogue, when there is dialogue, is pretty tepid. People say baldly what we need to know or mouth boilerplate lines: "<You think this is a game? Some kind of joke?>"
Then there's this exchange:
Renald: "… You should know…I am not easily impressed."
Catwoman as the Bartender: "Good. I like a challenge."
Sigh.
So, what is this thing?
It's cheesecake, as is evident on the cover. It's nasty-violent, which isn't evident on the cover, but the "Teen+" is a license to kill, I guess. It's sex in the form of a blatant sex scene—"Teen +" strikes again.
I guess that's what DC, Winick and March were going for. If so, they accomplished it well. Luckily for Winick, basic story-crafting and wordsmithing skills were not required.
A publisher can sell publications featuring T&A, violence and sex. A publisher can make the protagonist a thief, a self-appointed executioner and abusively, sexually aggressive. It's up to them.
If you find any or all of the above offensive or of no interest, don't buy Catwoman. What's the alternative? Storm DC with torches and pitchforks?
If DC Comics thinks this is a good way to go, that it serves their goals, let them.
But, jeez, Louise, did they have to drag Batman into it?

NEXT: I'm Determined to Find One I Like….

View more on Jim Shooter's website »

Like • 0 comments • flag

Published on October 05, 2011 08:38

October 3, 2011

DC Comics the New 52

Last night, I read the free preview of the New 52, Red Hood and the Outlaws #1 and Catwoman #1.
The introduction in the free preview is signed by the two co-publishers, Jim Lee and Dan DiDio. I wonder who wrote it. It says:

"WELCOME TO THE NEW 52!

This September, DC Comics explodes with 52 new #1 issues!"

I wouldn't use the word "explodes" if I were them. The last time DC had an "explosion" and launched a slew of new titles, an "implosion" soon followed. But, okay, that's ancient history and most people who read that intro won't know or laugh.
The intro goes on:

"The entire line of comic books is being renumbered, with new, innovative storylines featuring our most iconic characters helmed by some of the most creative minds in the industry.

"Not only will this initiative be compelling for existing readers, it will give new readers a precise entry point into our universe."

You can nitpick the imprecise copywriting. All readers exist, characters being "helmed" conjures an image of King Arthur's troops…. But, who cares?
By "existing readers" I guess they're referring to everyone who reads comic books now, not just the current crop of DC readers. Us. People to who at least understand what they mean by "renumbered" and some of whom care that there will be #1's on the covers.
By "new readers," I suppose, they mean people who have long wanted to read DC comic books but were waiting for a precise entry point to happen along. Plus people who previously had no desire to read comic books, whose interest has been stirred by the substantial PR effort behind the "initiative."
Because new readers have been given a "precise entry point" I assume the doors are slammed shut and locked once the #2's come out.
OPEN MESSAGE TO DC COMICS:
EVERY ISSUE SHOULD BE AN ENTRY POINT!
Fools.
Ahem.
All right, I'm old. According to the tag line JayJay appended to my name at the top of this page, I'm a "Large mammal." I suppose then, I must be a woolly mammoth or a megatherium or something. I learned my trade when comic book publishing was a still a mass market business.
But, let me take them at their word. They want to get all of us and at least some of them, the new readers interested and onboard…
…with this offering, for one:
Red Hood and the Outlaws #1
The cover:

As one of us, I suppose I should know who the three characters are. I don't. Good. Makes it easier to shift my mind into New Reader mode.
It's amazingly well drawn. I think anyone would take the image to be a symbolic shot rather than an actual scene from the story—a generic action pin-up. But good.
Here we go, still in New Reader mode….
Story page one:

Again, it's beautifully drawn. There are captions that give me a clue about what the situation is. The copy in the captions is conversational and expresses opinions, so I assume someone is narrating. Whoever it is, the prisoner must be the one he or she is referring to, one Roy Harper. Okay so far.
Pages two and three:

First, a strangely shaped panel for no apparent reason. But, what's going on is clear enough, even to New Reader me. Except that I paused at Roy Harper's line, "I'd shake, but I need both hands for my ball." What? Oh…I see.
I look back at page one, and yes, his "ball," as in ball and chain, is shown close enough to establish it, but it's colored so much like what's around it that I missed it. Maybe that's just me. That's what New Readers always think the first few times they miss something or fail to understand something, by the way. "It's me. I'm just not used to reading things like this."
Hmm. More oddly-shaped, crooked panels showing people with guns. Middle Easterners. Aha! The "locals" mentioned, and seen on the walls in the background of the first panel. I wonder for a moment if there's some significance to the way these little images are strewn around, shrug, and go looking for the next words to read…
…and arrive at a tangle of art. An odd-shaped panel with another one lying on top of it. Why do they cover part of the panel I'm supposed to be looking at with another panel? If there's an inset on a map, it's placed out in the middle of the Pacific Ocean where it doesn't cover anything, not even Easter Island. Oh, well.
The sudden shift to an overhead angle in the overlaid panel doesn't throw me because it's so well and clearly drawn. Roy Harper's head poking out into the underlying panel strikes me as strange, though. It just looks weird. Panel borders are routinely violated. They mean nothing. The mysterious quadrangles floating around between panels and into the next one puzzle me.
"Pastor Beerback" pokes out of the last panel and overlaps himself in the previous one. The little sliver of a highlight doesn't help much. It only cost me a tenth of a second to sort the images out, but still…. Is this desirable for some reason I don't understand?
Jim the comic book veteran talking for a moment: It wasn't until the third time I read this that I realized Pastor Beerback was tugging on his suspender making something go "CLICK" and "TZZT."
New Reader again: The effect shown means nothing to me, just more odd floating shapes.
Pages four and five:

The first panel's image is not only not clear-at-a-glance, but after staring at it for a few seconds I still don't understand it. I read the copy, hoping for a clue. More red captions. The first one says, "His name is Jason Todd." Okay, I'll guess that's the guy with the red head. Press on.
In the second panel it looks like a hand is drawing a gun. Is it one of the "locals?" One of the mercenaries? They're the only ones I've seen with guns. I guess that the other hands seen are Roy Harper's, unfolding his folded-up bow. Where did those arrows come from? No clues in the captions.
Third panel…wait, the captions are now Roy Harper's narration! What?!
At least the captions tell me what's happening in the picture. I doubt that I would have figured it out, or, at this point, have bothered trying.
Panel four, slowly the little light bulb comes on. The drawing is confusing, but after staring at it for a while, I realize that the bits of Pastor Beerback visible are the remains of a disguise. I also make the leap that the guy with the red head is "Red Hood." Jason Todd? Even New Reader/civilians understand, I think, that comic book costumed characters usually have regular names besides their nom d'guerre. Superman is also Clark Kent.
So, now, both armed—I figured out that it was the red head guy drawing the gun before—they kill lots of enemies.
This spread is where they lose me for good. I have to struggle too much to grasp what's going on. I don't have to work at it to understand most novels, most TV shows or most movies, but this takes some effort. New Reader me throws the book in the trash and doesn't bother with comic books again.
But I shall persist for the Hell of it.
It doesn't get better. Page six, why is the guard posted outside the gate so calm if there's a major firefight going on inside? What blows out the gate? A reference is made to Batman…okay, even I, New Reader, know who Batman is. Or used to be.
Page seven, more strange-shaped, weirdly angled panels for no apparent reason. They're wasting an awful lot of space. Look at all that unused space! Why?
Ahh! At last, I see. Some red captions are Red Hood narrating and some are Roy Harper narrating.
"Tanks!"
"Don't mention it."Cute.

Then…
"I hope you have at least one good backup."
"38 of them."
"I don't get it. Who do we know who carries a pair of 38s?"
Enter Starfire.
Good grief. The attempted joke doesn't even make sense. Failed adolescent humor.
Starfire poses over wreckage. Tank wreckage? Did I miss a page? Nope, that's page eight.
Starfire is wearing not much. There are effects around her hands indicating…something.
Page nine comes and I'm still not sure what happened to the tanks. Red Hood calls Starfire "Kori." I guess that's her real name. He asks her, "…could you fly ahead and take out any bad guys or tanks or anything?"
Now, let me get this straight, Red Hood. You have at your service someone who can destroy tanks and you decide it's a good idea to enter the prison in disguise, smuggle your friend his bow and arrows, shoot his chains off and fight your way out through a hail of bullets?
This story is stupid.
Page ten. A montage, I guess. Are those borders around the long shot of the island that vanish beneath the waves, or…? Is that young boy part of the hair-flipping scene or another montage bit, possibly elsewhere on the island?

Starfire? Cheesecake. Big time. If that's what they're selling here, I defend to the death their right to do so.
Looks like she has narrative captions too.
Page eleven has more cheesecake and a bunch of references to people and events that are meaningless to me. The page ends with a confusing bit. Who? What? Where is Red Hood/Jason going? Where is Starfire going? I guess the shadowy female figure wasn't Starfire. I suppose the weird word balloon was a clue….
Turns out the shadowy figure is "Essence."

Then things get really unintelligible. On page fourteen there's another batch of odd-shaped panels, but this time I'm guessing they show a vision Essence is providing to Jason.

I can make no sense of the images. And this is comics-vet me typing.
It goes downhill from there. Unintelligible crap.
The story ends with Red Hood surrounded by enemies I don't have much of a clue about. Red Hood is saying or thinking or narrating, "Finally. Someone to shoot."
Not that I really got to know the three stars of this book, not that they were introduced in a meaningful way, but at the end, I don't like any of them. Roy Harper? A snarky kid who can apparently fire two arrows at a time and have another one nocked before its predecessors have traveled two feet.
Jason/Red Hood? A stupid, snarky kid who likes to shoot people.
And Starfire? I think she's meant to appeal to the pubescent boy seen on page ten.
Don't get me wrong, I'm in favor of sex, in favor of sexuality, in favor of expressions of same in any creative endeavor involving representations of the human condition. There is more sexuality in my work than in most comic book writers' work. Sexuality is an important component of every character I write, just as it is an important part of every person I've ever met, even if by denial! And I've written a wide variety of characters with a wide range of sexual natures.
The problem I have with Starfire is that she's a device, not a character. Feh.

Jules Feiffer once said comic books were "booze for kids." Starfire as portrayed here is porn for kids. You know what I mean. Feh.
Get a real writer, DC. Or, Scott Lobdell, get a grip.
A blurb at the bottom of the last page promises "To be explained…"
Yes, DC and Scott, I think we deserve an explanation for what you've done.

NEXT: Catwoman #1

View more on Jim Shooter's website »

Like • 0 comments • flag

Published on October 03, 2011 18:04

September 30, 2011

Forget Paris and More Items of Interest

Forget Paris
Wednesday, I told you the Secret Origin of the X-Men creative team's Great European Expedition, so nicely documented by JayJay along with contributors to this blog yesterday. There's a coda to that tale.
A week or two after returning from the Great Expedition, one beautiful June Friday, John Romita, Jr., international bon vivant, turned up at my office to say merci beaucoup for arranging the trip, which he thoroughly enjoyed, despite a minor contretemps resulting from his unfamiliarity with the language, specifically, French for "she's married."
Zut alors!
But John escaped alive, was glad to be home and wanted to buy me a thank-you grapefruit juice. That was my libation of choice in those days.
Marvel closed at one PM on Fridays during the summer. So, soon, we were off to a lunch place and hangout in the neighborhood, Buchbinders, which was at the corner of Third and 27th, I think. Bob Layton somehow heard or sensed that someone else was buying and tagged along.
We had one round at Buchbinders, for which John dutifully paid, but then he and Bob wanted to go to a classier, better venue. My spider-sense was warning me that there was danger ahead, but….
We cabbed to the Water Club, a very upscale restaurant built atop a barge that's moored in the East River just south of the heliport at 34th Street. Beautiful place, very elegant, great food. It has a relatively casual rooftop bar called the Crow's Nest, and that, on this sunny, perfect June afternoon, was the destination.
The Crow's Nest had everything—a brilliant view of the city, boats and ships gliding up and down the river, helicopters landing and taking off next door…
…and a very charming, beautiful waitress. Let's call her Chloe—not her real name.
After quickly and expertly ascertaining that Chloe was a mademoiselle, John, in his polite and witty way, made conversation at every opportunity. A simple truth:
More rounds of drinks = more opportunities
Uh-oh. How much grapefruit juice can a man take?
Hours passed….
At some point, finally, John went over to the servers' station, directed Chloe's attention to a helicopter taking off and told her that he and his friends were going to charter a 'copter tonight and fly down to Atlantic City. Would she like to come?
A moment later, John returned to the table, visibly shaken. She said yes. He never expected her to say yes.
So, he said, excitedly, we have to do it! Are you with me?
No, I said. But since I was the only one sober enough to dial a phone, I'd find out for him what it would cost.
Too much. The heliport closed at one AM, I think, so you'd have to pay to keep the heliport open all night as well as for the flight, the pilot, a hotel room for the pilot so he could sleep while you lost money at the casino…way too much. But the Yellow Pages enlightened me to the fact that you could charter a small airplane for less than we'd spent on beverages.
Did I mention that John and Bob switched from cocktails to Dom Perignon at $110 a bottle, once they crossed the threshold of expansiveness? Did I mention that John was passing out flute-fulls to strangers. "Come on! Join the party!"
Voilà.
John insisted, demanded that we do it, that we all go, which would somehow make it less spooky for Chloe, I suppose.
You know…I was making pretty good money, I generally worked long hours and worked every day…I was single, so it wasn't like I was invading the kids' college fund. And, I had a feeling, even if I had to live on rice and beans for a month afterward, that this was going to become a story I would tell for the rest of my life.
And John, younger than me and at least as crazy, had X-Men royalties to burn.
Okay.
At eleven PM, Chloe was supposed to get off work. But some other server didn't show up, there was a wedding reception running long and they needed her to stay till at least two AM. Sorry.
John said to me, "What are we going to do?"
I growled, "There's a plane waiting for us on the tarmac at the Marine Air Terminal. It's paid for. Non-refundable. On my credit card. We are going to Atlantic City. Got it?"
As we were leaving, Chloe gave me a note with her number on it. She said, "I gave my number to Johnny, but I think he might lose it, so, if he does, give him this, okay?"
So off went we three cab-alleros in a taxi. The Marine Air Terminal is next door to La Guardia.
It was a small plane. Seated five, I think. Bob asked if he could sit in the copilot's seat, and the pilot allowed it.
The pilot was a nice guy, clearly good at what he did and as nuts as we were. After we took off, he let Bob drive! No, Bob isn't a pilot, or wasn't at the time, anyway. "Head toward the World Trade Towers," said the pilot, "and turn left."
Bob wanted to try flying between the towers, but the pilot said no. He wasn't that nuts.
Bob drove all the way down. The pilot had a cooler full of beer and soda onboard, so there was Bob with a beer in one hand and the steering yoke in the other….
The pilot landed the plane, told us to call him when we wanted to return and went off to nap somewhere.
We went to Caesars and spent three or four hours playing blackjack. Because the gods smile upon nitwits sometimes, Bob broke even, John won a bottle or two of Dom's worth, though he was fuzzy-headed enough by then to be splitting tens (drawing aces to each of them!) and I won a bit more than he did. That eased the pain in the wallet a little.
We flew back as the sun was coming up. Beautiful. Bob drove again.
Back in Manhattan, I went home, Bob went home and John, who lived in Long Beach, Long Island, fell asleep sitting on the curb out in front of the parking garage where his Beamer was imprisoned waiting for the place to open. So he said. I believe a policeman gently awakened him.
John, indeed, lost Chloe's number, but I gave him the spare. I believe they ended up being an item for a while.
I have told that story many times. There's more to tell…but not here.
C'est tout.

More Items of Interest
Back when I worked for DC in 1975, for some reason I was given these models sheets. Things certainly have changed since then: