Comics I Bought 21 May 2009

This week's comic buying was tinged with the unfortunate but inevitable news of the cancellation of Captain Britain and MI:13. This is nothing new in mainstream comics – a good comic book starring lesser lights in the superhero firmament gets critical praise but not enough people buy it. Some might want to blame Marvel, but it's not their fault if they can't persuade people to buy a good comic, and they are allowing Paul Cornell to finish his story instead of rushing it. On to comics that are still doing okay.

Ex Machina #42
I don't know what to write about Ex Machina every month. Well, I don't know what to write full stop, but that doesn't stop me (unfortunately). Mitchell Hundred is an interesting character, Brian K Vaughan writes an interesting comic (with good dialogue, humour and action) and Tony Harris' art is always good – he does some interesting things with shadows in a dialogue scene, for example. These are all the things that a good comic should have, as well as having a reason to come back each month.

Herogasm #1
In which Garth Ennis indulges in his juvenile sense of humour. It astounds me how someone who can write excellent, profound, intelligent and even moving comic books can produce such adolescent material – look, superheroes all having sex with each other! Tee, hee. I don't know if he thinks that it is what comic book fans want, or if he just uses it as a tool to sell comics. I hope it's just the first issue and we can get to the actual story itself next issue. Things aren't helped by the uninspired art of John McCrea – this isn't the same fun and interesting style he employed in Hitman, which makes this art look even worse.

Jack of Fables #34
Even without Jack in the Jack of Fables, it's still an annoying book. Do Willingham and Sturges actually think it's funny? Let's change Bigby into different animals – that'll make the kids laugh. Apart from discovering the identity of the drooling chap in a straitjacket is Kevin's twin brother, Writer's Block (which is rather nice), there isn't much to this book – nothing really happens, nothing of note occurs apart from Bigby being turned into a little girl. And there's a repeat of the little blue ox thinking nonsense for six panels on a page. I look forward to Fables getting back on track and dealing with its own storylines.

From A Library – Batman: Under The Hood

Batman #635–641 (vol. 1) and #645–650 + Annual #25
by Judd Winick and Doug Mahnke, Paul Lee, Shane Davis, Eric Battle

Growing up, there were superheroes who were mostly and definitely dead, not coming back, died in action: Bucky, Barry Allen and Jason Todd. How things change. Now, I know nothing in comics is sacrosanct but it was important that these characters were dead. They had a purpose in their heroism and their end. These things are no longer important when the return can be used as an event in the modern comic book industry. I'm not judging this aspect of the medium I enjoy so much; it's just the way it is. As long as we get a good story out of it (Brubaker's return of Bucky was a delightful surprise), I really don't care. Hell, I didn't care one way or another about Hal Jordan, but Geoff Johns wrote an enjoyable tale about his return to the DC universe, so history schmistory I say.

The important thing here: if you're going to bring back someone from the dead, then (a) it had better be a good story and (b) the manner in which you bring them back from the dead had better be good too (see Brubaker's Bucky for prime example). This was my worry about this story: it was under the control of Judd Winick. I loved Winick's early work – The Adventures of Barry Ween, Boy Genius is quite simply superb – but his superhero work (Green Arrow and Exiles being examples I have read) was never as good. The thought that he would be responsible for such a huge turnaround in the Batman mythos didn't fill me with confidence.

Fortunately, the story in the first volume is well handled: it starts with Batman fighting a villain in a red hood, who is as good a fighter as Batman, who unmasks Batman before unmasking himself to the surprise of Batman. Cut to five weeks earlier: there has been a hostile takeover of Wayne Industries R&D; the Red Hood has taken over the drug trade (offering the dealers protection from Batman and the Black Mask, the gang boss for whom they had been working for). In the course of events, Batman and Nightwing face off against Red Hood and then Amazo (in a well-choreographed fight scene, well narrated and handled). The Red Hood steals kryptonite from the Black Mask just to get the lay of the land, before he beats up the Joker with a crowbar and revealing who he is – something Batman suspected when he contacts Zatanna, Green Arrow and Superman (asking the latter two what it was like coming back from the dead). Then the Red Hood reveals who he is to Batman, providing him with blood and hair so that he can prove who he says he is: Jason Todd, the second Robin, killed by the Joker (or, rather, killed by a public vote), the character that provided the extra guilt for Batman when he is working with new sidekicks.

In the second volume, the story starts out with flashbacks to the early days of Todd, how he became Robin (weren't comics simpler, even back then), what he was like as Robin, how he became dangerous and angry. Then it returns to the present, with Todd destroying the Black Mask's operation and toying with Batman ('I just love to watch you work'). Things get complicated when Deathstroke offers Black Mask a position in The Society, and offers help in the shape of Captain Nazi and the Hyena ('Hyena kind of looks like a girl from the back'), meaning Todd and Batman have to work together. However, the story goes off the rails when an entire issue shows a fight between the Red Hood and Black Mask, which then turns out to be a fake-out – it's not Todd, who has the Joker hostage and wants Batman for the final face off.

The problem with the face off is that resolution is ridiculous and badly handled; Todd is provided with perfect motivation – he is angry with Batman because the Joker is still alive, not for all his other crimes but for killing Todd specifically. This is understandable reason for what he has been doing and how he's been doing it; however, the response from Batman is poor: 'It'd be too damned easy', which is a weak response to the crux of the entire story. It's made worse by the dramatically unsatisfying and poorly choreographed stand-off ending, which ruins the good work preceding it. There is an epilogue which, although nicely drawn by Shane Davis, undermines the entire story by coming up with a really ridiculous explanation of how he came back: Superboy Prime punching the multiverse (or whatever it was) somehow just brought Jason Todd back to life. That's it. Basically, it was magic. No good answer, just a wand wave. The only enjoyable aspect was that he was captured by Talia Al Ghul, who puts him in a Lazarus Pit, which brings back his memory (letting him go with the words: 'You remain unavenged'). But it goes out of the way to tie it in, even linking it into the awful Hush story (in the Clayface fight chapter). Such a shame.

There are good things here. Winick creates a believable and entertaining story for the most part. The way he has Todd operating and Batman reacting works well, and there is lots of humour (something he can overplay, but he balances it well). He is made to look even better by the sterling art of Mahnke – his muscular, moody, dynamic, well-choreographed, expressive art is spectacularly good and perfect for Batman. It is a shame that he doesn't pencil the entire storyline – Shane Davis does some nice fill-in issues, but Paul Lee's art is weak by comparison, and Eric Battle's art is messy, rushed and uninspired next to his work. The first volume in this collection is the strongest, with an emotional connection to Batman, Todd's MO and Manhke's art, but it falls apart in the last half of the second collection, leaving the reader with a sense of a wasted opportunity.

Film Review: Coraline

I have film guilt: I wanted to enjoy Coraline more than I actually did. I liked the book and was looking forward to seeing this in the cinema, especially in 3D. However, although the film is technically excellent and a good adaptation, I didn't have fun while watching the film. Does that make me a bad person?

Coraline (Dakota Fanning) is the daughter of two writers who ignore her and her adventurous streak, and are terrible cooks. Having moved to new accommodation – with eccentric neighbours Mrs Spink and Mrs Forcible (two retired burlesque actress, voiced by Jennifer Saunders and Dawn French) and a gymnastic Russian called Mr Bobinsky (Ian McShane) – she discovers a small door that has been bricked up on the other side. When she goes through the door, she find another world, and her other parents – they are fun and caring and pay attention to her and give her lovely food and a lovely room. Except for having buttons for eyes, they would be perfect. Until Coraline's other mother (Teri Hatcher) tells Coraline that, if she wants to stay, she has to sew buttons in her eyes as well.

The film is stunning to look at – Henry Selick's stop-motion animation is a delight; the detail, the imagination, the movement, the character, the exquisiteness make for a visual treat. Even the extra bits of CGI that are used to assist in the dazzle don't detract from the spectacle. The attention to detail is even more impressive when you consider that it has been done for 3D, which involves doing everything twice to give the illusion of 3D. The immersive texture to the film is impressive and there are some lovely 3D touches but the film doesn't really need to be 3D – stop-motion animation has always seemed more immersive anyway, and there is nothing in particular that requires it.

The story is creepy and charming, and the fact that a film has been made with a strong female character in the lead, showing determination and resourcefulness and heroism, is great. But the film itself is slow – I feel such an ungrateful wretch, some sort of attention-deficit child – and lacks much in the way of big laughs or stand-out moments. The cinema had some kids in there and they weren't captivated by it – like the rest of the audience, they were quiet and even popped out halfway, presumably for the toilet, because their interest wasn't being kept. The film is adorable and scary and an amazing feat, it's just not amazing.

Rating: VID

Comics I Bought 14 May 2009

The equal opportunity part of me feels slightly bad for only buying comics from the big two this week – last week's haul was two-thirds independent publishers, and no Marvel – but I assuage my guilt slightly with the purchase of a first issue of a Vertigo comic, even though it was only a dollar. I overthink my comic book purchases, don't I?

Captain Britain and MI:13 #13
I'm glad to be buying this in monthly format because it (a) it's great and (b) it isn't selling nearly enough for such a good comic. This issue is a corker because it gets to the 'lowest moment' section of the story: this is the point when the bad guys have done their worse and the good guys look like they don't have a hope of winning. It is an expected part of the narrative but Cornell sells it absolutely perfectly: Dracula's plan and execution are flawless, heroes from outside Britain can't get in, our heroes fight back but are useless against the onslaught. Cornell even kills off the members of the Houses of Parliament, the wish of all British anarchists. I don't know how he plans to turn everything around in the next issue, based on how this one ends, but I can't wait to find out.

Fables #84
Ah, Jack. How much do you annoy me? Let me count the ways ... The crossover continues as Jack takes over Fables for an issue and ruins the tone – blustering, shouting, being smug and incredibly punchable. The way the plot just allows him to walk into the Farm and take over running things was just annoying, and a little clichéd, which is not something I've come to expect from Fables. I like the fact that Jack knows he is being read – I loved the idea with Ambush Bug, Deadpool, She-Hulk – but, unlike those characters, Jack is insufferable prick and that really gets in the way of enjoying the book. It doesn't help that Akins' art doesn't get the Fables' characters quite right; they look slightly off, which is bad timing because it's the only part of the story that is interesting.

X-Factor #43
Peter David keeps the fun coming in X-Factor; the unpredictability, the humour ('Sorry, that wasn't very “noir.” The whole hugging thing.'), the character development, left to his own devices in his little corner of the X-universe, is a delight. Also, the build-up and the kiss itself is really quite moving, which makes me sound really sad but I don't care. It is also an advert for buying a book in the monthly format – the ending to this issue is completely out of left-field. I'm really enjoying this book on a consistent basis, so much so that I almost don't care about the use of two artists.

The Unwritten #1
A 40-page story, which sets up a long-term narrative but also tells a complete and satisfying tale in its own right, all for a dollar? Why doesn't everybody do ongoing series like this? Mike Carey and Peter Gross have created a good book with a strong central premise and great potential for future stories: Tom Taylor is the son of an author who has created the most popular series fantasy books, about a boy wizard called Tommy Taylor who was based on Tom. He now lives on the convention circuit because his father, Wilson, has disappeared and left all the money in trusts he cannot access. Tommy is bitter and angry but things get worse when it seems he may not actually be Wilson's son. And things get more complicated when reality and fantasy seem to merge ... Carey and Gross pack a lot into this first issue, setting up the situation, telling the story, developing their characters and giving us humour and adventure along the way. This series has got legs and I look forward to seeing it get its chance.

Film Review: Star Trek

Yes, the world needs another film review for Star Trek. And several days late as well.

Let's get the assessment out of the way first: I really enjoyed Star Trek. It was entertaining, exciting, fun, engaging, pacy without being rushed, spectacular to look at and leaves you with a good feeling as you leave the cinema. It is an excellent reboot of a series that needed something to energise it and sets up the potential for equally good films.

As with most amateur reviews of the film, I am honour-bound to discuss my connection to Star Trek. So, I watched Star Trek growing up and it had an affect on me: there is the possibility that Spock influenced me becoming a scientist (although I'm not one any more) and I have a preference for clamshell mobile phones because they remind me of Trek communicators. However, I am not a Trekkie/Trekker – I don't go beyond being a fan of geek entertainment who enjoys science fiction, so I don't have long-held beliefs in what makes a good Trek film (and my favourite Star Trek film is First Contact). Disclaimer over.

A quick plot synopsis: James T Kirk is born in space as his father dies as a starship captain saving 800 people (including James and his mum); he grows up a rebel, living near where starships are built, until Captain Pike (Bruce Greenwood) dares him to become a cadet at Starfleet academy. Meanwhile, Spock is a rebel in his own way on Vulcan, refusing to join the Science Academy on Vulcan and joining Starfleet because other Vulcans disapprove of his human ancestry. After cheating on the Kobayashi Maru test, written by Spock, Kirk is suspended but he gets brought on board the Enterprise by his friend Bones McCoy when the cadets are promoted to active duty when the planet Vulcan is under threat. The threat is the same ship responsible for the death of Kirk's father: Romulans from the future, who holds Spock responsible for the death of his planet, are destroying Vulcan in retaliation. The same singularity that brought them from the future also brings Spock from the future to the present time. The Enterprise is the only ship to be ready when they arrive at Vulcan, with Spock as First Officer – but when Captain Pike is ordered to meet the Romulans, he promotes Spock to Captain and Kirk to First Officer – setting up the dominoes that will fall to give us the bridge crew of the Enterprise that we all know ...

First off, the good stuff. The film looks fabulous – the Enterprise looks sex-ay in all the right ways, gleaming and shiny and designery, like an Apple-influenced spaceship. The special effects are great and the action are all spot on (and I like the moments in space, which result in an absence of noise). The casting is perfect: the actors who are playing the younger versions of the characters we know channel them without slavishly impersonating them. Chris Pine is Kirk NOT Shatner, which is an important distinction – Shatner has a, ahem, unique acting style, so an impression wouldn't have worked, and Pine acts the cockiness, the bravado, the charm, the arrogance; as Kermode said in his review, the way he sat in the captain's seat WAS Kirk. Zachary Quinto is great as Spock – I've never liked him as an actor on Heroes, but here he is perfect as Spock in intonation and delivery and eyebrow arching. But the best is Karl Urban as Leonard 'Bones' McCoy – the irascibility, the grumpiness, the attitude, the delivery of the snipey aside are just perfect.

The rest of the cast are good: Greenwood does a great Pike, Zoe Saldana is a good Uhura; and Anton Yulchin and John Cho make good Chekov and Sulu, respectively. Simon Pegg is good as Scotty in the sense of being the comic relief – he does comedy with ease and brings real energy to the role. The accent is okay but I could be biased against him knowing that he is English and doing an accent – even though I love Pegg, I have always wondered what it would have been like with an actual Scot in the role, and one who is a huge fan of Star Trek: namely, James McAvoy. But comedy was needed, and Pegg is perfect for that – and he worked with JJ Abrams on Mission: Impossible III.

There are nice in-jokes for Star Trek fans, with some famous lines getting said ('I'm a doctor, not a physicist'; 'Fascinating' 'I'm giving her all she's got, Captain!' 'Are you out of your Vulcan mind?') and references to Trek lore (a mention of Admiral Archer from Enterprise, Sulu and fencing, Chekov not being able to enunciate 'w'), but there is also comedy for non-fans – it's part of the balance that Abrams and screenwriters Robert Orci and Alex Kurtzman tread finely but tremendously successfully, to keep everyone happy with the film they've made. The story is straightforward, even with the time-travel element, and provides all the thrills and action anybody could want. And, at its heart, it is a story about friendship – seemingly the only story in Star Trek: the friendship between Spock and Kirk (which does represent the basis of Trek: complete opposites can come together and become a team for good).

The film is very good but it is not perfect, so let's talk about the bad stuff. From a man who became famous for a television series about a strong female character in Alias, the use of women in the film is rather poor. The character of Uhura was always used badly in the original series, but it was the 1960s, so it has an excuse. In 2009, Uhura and the other women in the film should be used well. However, this is not the case – Kirk's mother is used only to give birth to him and nothing more; Spock's mother (Winona Ryder in ageing make-up – why? Wouldn't it have been easier to have someone of the right age?) has a few lines and only exists to die and instigate Spock's emotions; the emotional backstory for the villain of the piece is not just the death of his entire planet but also because his wife (and kids) died, because women aren't people, they are plot points; and Uhura, who is shown to be a smart, resourceful and independent woman before getting on the Enterprise, ends up with nothing to do on the bridge and only interacts with the story by being Spock's girlfriend. I know that a film is different to a television programme, where you have time to give all characters equal time, and films have to depend on a few main character arcs, but it seems not only a shame but a bit of a miss-step to sideline one of the most famous women in science fiction.

Story-wise, I had a few issues. Not in a Star Trek way, just from a narrative perspective. Using time travel as the plot device and as the way to start Star Trek afresh – basically, this is alternate Earth Star Trek, so they can do anything without worrying about the years of continuity – is a cheat, which is appropriate when we get to see the notorious scene where Kirk cheats on the Kobayashi Maru test (echoing the scene in Wrath of Khan where we learn of this by having Kirk eating an apple). It's a rather clumsy reboot button, and it niggled me. The time travel aspect also ruins the central idea of the Star Trek canon; namely, the friendship between Kirk and Spock. Having been told by the future Spock that they become friends, it removes the development of the relationship in an organic fashion. If fate has already determined it, where's the excitement? Still, Pine and Quinto have good chemistry, working off each other well and playing up the classic elements we know, so it's enough to ignore this element.

There are too many 'plot-driving contrivances' – young Spock, who should put Kirk in the brig for his insubordination, decides to jettison him off the ship onto a nearby ice planet. Where, while escaping from some CGI beasties, Kirk happens to be saved by old Spock from the future (who has been dumped on this planet by the man who hated him so much that he supposedly want him to suffer while he killed his entire planet – surely it would be easier to witness his pain if Spock was actually in the room with him?). And then they happen to meet a young Montgomery Scott on this desolate planet, who happens to have the capability to teleport them onto a ship moving at warp speed (after Spock gives him the final variable to his equation that he hasn't finished yet). It stretches things but you're too busy enjoying the film to care about them at the time – the film is just too entertaining to get in the way. Humour, action, spectacle, excitement, courageous acts, emotional connection – Star Trek has it all, and it a wonderful summer blockbuster film.

Rating: DAVE

Comics I Bought 8 May 2009

Too many comics for self-indulgent preamble. Even Ignition City #2 arrived.

Astro City: The Dark Age Book 3 #1
It's been over a year since the last Astro City book, which is a shame when it's such a good book. Brent Anderson's art, although a style I don't like, suits the mood because it feels old, appropriate when this story is set in the 1980s. The Royal brothers are trying to locate the killer of their parents, killed when they were kids; this involves Royal going undercover in an organisation that provides supervillain henchmen, a nice conceit from Kurt Busiek. It's nice to have Astro City back – I'll be buying the individual issues as they come out, even though it will read better as a collection, because Busiek and Astro City warrant it.

The Boys #30
This issue is the pause in the story – Butcher and Wee Hughie have a chat, The Frenchman and The Female share a moment, Mother's Milk fulfils a promise, Hughie and Annie reveal without revealing, and Butcher shows his bastardry in case we'd forgotten. Ennis can write these moments without them being sappy or pointless, and it's a nice breather before the second half of the big story begins. Robertson provides some of his best art – he always worked well with the characterisation of his cast. I'm looking forward to the second half of Ennis' look under the covers of his view of superhero comic book tropes.

Buffy the Vampire Slayer #25
The television series always had quieter and smaller moments, and they could also be rather dull affairs. The sub-plot about Dawn being turned into a giant and a centaur by a thricewise comes to a head when she is turned into a doll (although I didn't recognise her until later in the story) and Buffy sets out to find her. Turns out that it was just a simple spell by Dawn's boyfriend Kenny after she slept with his flatmate, and all she had to do was say sorry for it to end. Ho hum. There are some nice flashes of cultural humour (Buffy: 'Who dresses like Wolverine for fun?' Xander: 'Certainly not me. Any proof you've seen to the contrary could easily have been Photoshopped, and, besides, I was drunk.') and Georges Jeanty provides his strongest art for a while, but this series needs to get back on track and kick it up a notch.

Ignition City #2
Talking of kicking it up a notch, Ellis brings some sizzle to this second issue after the rather pedestrian first issue. Things happen, people interact, interesting ideas flow (the alien language, the harvest-moon songlock), the reasons behind the death start to emerge, history of the city and the people begin to emerge – this is the pace and impact the first issue should have had, especially in a limited series. I've never seen Deadwood, which is part of Ellis' inspiration for this story, so I don't know if there are supposed to be connections that I don't recognise, but it could explain the unusual tone to the book – it has some Ellis touches but it is also distinctly different. Pagliarani's art seems to be even uglier this issue but I don't know if that's deliberate to reflect the atmosphere Ellis wants; it still isn't particularly pleasant to look at unfortunately.

Killer of Demons #3
The final issue of this excellent and enjoyable mini-series is just as good as the first two issues and provides a perfect continuation point for further mini-series. The end to this story involves a real change in status for the universe Yost has created, and the climax even throws in a Fight Club joke. This is funny and entertaining, but Yost just lets Wegener go to town on the hilarious over-the-top violence – his kinetic, visceral, sharp-lined art style is a delight, and makes the killing of demons so much fun, it's almost criminal (if you'll pardon the atrocious pun). This has been a great little series and I can't wait for another series.

Seaguy: Slaves of Mickey Eye #2
This has to be the most quaintly charming and oddball book I've read in a while – El Macho, king of the Bulldressers of Los Huevos! Morrison can do such beautiful little stories when he wants to, and the duping of Seaguy by Doc Hero and the Disney-like corporation is one of those. To do this, he needs the gorgeous art of Cameron Stewart to evoke this dreamlike quality – his Carmen is absolutely beautiful, exactly the sort of vision to entrance a man in a fake world. His bull, El Monstro, is so adorable – dressing a bull in women's clothing is not the sort of thing you expect to see in a comic book from DC. Utterly delightful.

From A Library – Spider-Man: Brand New Day volumes 1 & 2

Vol. 1: Free Comic Book Day 2007 (Dan Slott & Phil Jimenez) & Amazing Spider-Man #546–551 (#546–548 Slott & Steve McNiven + Marc Guggenheim & Greg Land, Bob Gale + Phil Winslade, Zeb Wells & Mike Deodato; #549–551 Guggenheim & Salvador Larroca)
Vol. 2: Amazing Spider-Man #552–558 (#552–554 Gale & Jimenez; #555–557 Wells & Chris Bachalo; #558 Gale & Barry Kitson)

There are times I wish I could enjoy stories of Spider-Man but I can't – whenever I read the book, it seems to be the same thing: Peter Parker has a horrible life (no money, job always in trouble, doing the right thing that always leads to his life getting even worse) and the writers seem to enjoy piling on the misery, as if he was responsible for all the hazing they received as a high schoolers. It's the only thing that prevents me from watching the excellent first two Sam Raimi Spider-Man films – let's treat Spidey like shit. I just don't understand it, and I can't get past it when reading Spider-Man comics.

The world of Spider-Man was recently turned upside-down by the One More Day storyline, where the happy and normal(ish) marriage between Peter Parker and Mary Jane Watson is dismantled by Mephisto so that Joe Quesada could have his wish to return Spider-Man back to the way he was originally: the hard-luck hero who could be the reader. Now, I didn't read that story, and have no interest in doing so, but I wanted to see what the new-look Spidey for the new millennium was like. No ties to continuity, no more public identity due to Civil War, no more marriage to a hot supermodel to annoy the Editor-in-Chief. Because I don't let my prejudices get in the way of good comics.

Marvel have got together an interesting team of writers (called the 'Brain Trust': Slott the Marvel man, Guggenheim the TV writer, Gale the film writer and Wells the – I'm not too sure about Wells) to bring cohesion to the series, and have proved the seriousness of the reboot with big name artists: Jimenez, McNiven, Larroca, Bachalo and Kitson are in the big leagues and known for their superhero work. There is now only the one Spider-Man comic, although it is now coming out more frequently, with a concerted effort to make it a major mover in the Marvel universe, but what about the stories themselves?

From what I can see, it seems to be a case of doing the old-style Spidey stories but with a modern sheen. Peter is back to being a single chap with money and job worries who tries to balance normal life with his secret identity – just like it was in the old days – but it's set now and the art looks better. After talking about Jimenez's art recently, it's nice to see it again and he makes for a good fit for Spidey: lithe, dynamic, not excessively muscular, detailed, expressive. McNiven does his usual solid job, taking to Spidey well after his big job on Civil War. Larocca isn't quite as smooth – it seems slightly off, not as fluid, as if he's been working on the mutant books so long that he hasn't found his Spidey legs yet. The most interesting is Bachalo – he brings his usual warped perspective to a snow-bound tale that is not what you would expect from a Spider-Man book, but it works really well for the story, with lots of odd angles and skewed characters surrounding the thin Spider-Man he draws.

Writing-wise, there are different feels for each arc – Slott brings a lot of humour, as expected based on his previous work, and which is very important for Spidey: he has to be the funniest guy in the fight or you're missing the point. Guggenheim brings his TV work to the job, writing good dialogue and juggling the different strands. Gale, although a good writer, isn't funny – his Spidey quips are mundane and ordinary. Wells, despite my initial hesitance, provides the most interesting and different adventure – the mystical influences are not something I associate with the character nor with the direction this new take displays in the previous issues. It might feel more like a Claremont X-Men tale, perhaps, but it's the one that sticks out in the mind compared with the others.

Surveying the two books as a whole, there is evidence of new – Mister Negative (an interesting-looking villain, until we find out that his civilian identity knows Aunt May, which is a throwback), Menace, giving J Jonah Jameson a heart attack, a new editor of the Daily Bugle – but it still harks back to the way things used to be done. Keeping the status quo, doing the same things (Spidey does his best but always comes out worst), even the jaunty narration boxes ('Glad ya made it back, Spidey-fans!', 'There's clearly no way Spidey can get out of this, right?'), which feel like Stan Lee-isms for the Noughties, give the overall impression of 'having your cake and eating it too': everything is exactly the same as you remember, nothing is different, come back to Spider-Man as it was and always should have been, everything is just fine. The phrase 'the illusion of change' never seemed more appropriate. In the first collection, there is a manifesto outlining the 'new' approach to Spider-Man, which basically states it: keep Peter Parker downtrodden, keep him miserable, nothing good ever happens. That's not aspirational, that's depressing and disheartening. I don't want to read that – it's sadistic. Maybe we get the Spider-Man we deserve, but it's the Spider-Man you deserve because I won't be back for more (even though the story finishes on a cliffhanger, something I'm not used to seeing in a collection).

Comic Book Artist: Phil Jimenez

Phil Jimenez is the modern day George Perez. And I think he's better than Perez. There, I said it. You may accuse me of heresy if you wish, but I would much rather read a Jimenez-drawn book than a Perez book. They both excel at drawing pages and panels that are filled with characters and detail, with excellent anatomy and an ability to draw beautiful women that are not highly sexualised, which is something rare and special in the modern superhero industry.

Another Perez–Jimenez connection is Wonder Woman – both have written and drawn the character, although the Perez run is perhaps more lauded. Their starts were in opposite camps: Perez made his name at Marvel, whereas Jimenez started out at DC, which is where I immediately think of when I think about his work. Even though Jimenez is now on an exclusive contract at Marvel, and drawing their flagship character as part of the new approach to Spider-man (and he famously drew the infamous Barack Obama cover to Amazing Spider-man), he did work on some Marvel books beforehand – he drew an X-Men mini-series as well as drawing some issues of New X-Men with Grant Morrison.

There is another connection to Morrison – he drew the second 'season' of The Invisibles, Morrison's creator-owned book; this was rather unusual at the time because Jimenez was a superhero artist, working on the likes of the New/Team Titans and Tempest (which he also wrote), but it showed his desire to break out of the mould and try new things. Although he would continue working on superheroes (JLA/Titans, Planetary/Authority, his Wonder Woman run), he also created, wrote and drew Otherworld, a 7-issue mini-series for Vertigo.

The final connection to Perez is when Jimenez was the main penciller on Infinite Crisis, to complement Perez's art on the original Crisis on Infinite Earths – if you want a superstar artist who can actually draw millions of characters in interesting ways, make them look cool and make you care about a huge company-wide crossover, Jimenez is the man to call. Although I didn't enjoy the story, I did like Jimenez's art, which was his usual high quality.

A discussion of Jimenez has to mention his sexuality – as one of the most well-known openly gay comic book creators in the mainstream, Jimenez is a role model for any young gay men wanting to work in comic books, and it's great to see one of the superstar artists in a medium not exactly known for its open-mindedness is allowed to be gay.

For an artist I admire, I don't own a lot of Jimenez-drawn books; I have The Invisibles, the JLA/Titans series, the Planetary/Authority one-shot and the New X-Men issues. I think it stems from not being a great fan of the stuff he's done for the most part – his superhero work at DC has been on properties that don't really interest me. Which is a shame, because I've missed out on a body of work that has superheroes drawn the way they should be: lithe, well proportioned, noble, exquisitely rendered, heroic and pure. His attention to detail in anatomy, design and backgrounds displays craft and love. His men and women are beautiful but not titillating – he's one of the few artists who can draw a sexy woman in a mini-skirt and not make you feel dirty for looking at it. Now, if he can only work on books I want to buy ...


Get a full list of his work at Comic Book Database [LINK] and see some of his art at Comic Art Community gallery [LINK]. There is an out-of-date fan site [LINK] or you can see him in person on YouTube [Part 1/Part 2].

X-Men Origins: Wolverine Poster Does Not Make Sense

I know I reviewed the film yesterday, so apologies for continuing to discuss peripheral aspects of the movie. I wanted to point out what I thought was a bit of a discrepancy in the movie poster. The main poster image for X-Men Origins: Wolverine looked something like this (I've used the landscape version for ease of comparison; you can see the portrait version in my review):

Now, the first thing that is wrong with this image (apart from losing the colon that is part of the title for the sake of a prettier-looking setting for the words) is that this is supposed to be the solo film for Wolverine but he is surrounded by people. Not only is it a waste of Hugh Jackman's impressive shape and look, but it is also a mixed message. Wolverine is so popular after three X-Men films that he gets his own film but he apparently needs a supporting cast to entice you to watch this film. Also, the film is supposed to be about the main character you know about, but what about these other people only the fans know about? The free weekly magazine ShortList provided a handy guide to some of these people – they also provide information about people who aren't even on the poster:

Now, I realise that this is a paid-for promotion, but who the hell wrote this rubbish? It's cornier than the poorly written explanations in Previews. For Sabretooth: 'Trust us, this is one family domestic you don't want to get involved in.' I feel dirty just writing that out. Not to mention the mention of a teleportation device for Wade Wilson that is never actually used in the film. And why mention that Gambit is Cajun? Is that a defining characteristic? It's just depressing. But ShortList, in a small item in the magazine, also says that Barry Windsor-Smith was 'one of the men responsible for the X-Men franchise', so facts are something with which they are only on passing terms. In a previous issue, they stated not once but twice that Max Payne was a comic-book adaptation.

The other nonsensical aspect of the X-Men Origins: Wolverine poster is that it has Cyclops and Emma Frost on it. Why are they there? In the film, they are barely on screen for more than a few minutes, yet somehow they warrant a place on the poster? The presence of Kayla Silverfox on the poster also seems odd (much like her presence in the trailers), suggesting her importance and ultimate position in the narrative beyond what should be revealed before the film. The whole composition annoys me and sends out the wrong message about the film: it may be called Wolverine but these people are important as well, even though you have no idea who they are. That's not the way to get people to watch your film.

Film Review – X-Men Origins: Wolverine

When I was a teenager, reading Chris Claremont's Uncanny X-Men and thinking Wolverine was a cool character, I never imagined that it would not only be a live-action film but also be a hyped blockbuster to start the summer season. Add to the mix the pirated version being leaked a month before the film and the resultant media commotion, and you have the sort of dream world a comic book could never have envisioned (much like cyberpunk didn't see the mobile phone in their futures). Therefore, it's a shame that the movie itself isn't very good – it is perfectly serviceable entertainment, with some nice action and some humour, but it's just okay and nothing more.

The heart of the problem is the fact that Hugh Jackman is a nice bloke – not that he can't play the Wolverine berserker rage, which he manages fine, but because he is producer on this film and he thinks that the reason he has become a star is because the geeks have supported him in role as Wolverine and he believes that he is repaying the fans by giving them what he thinks they want: the Wolverine origin. As producer and star, he had the clout to influence the direction of the film and he has decided to not take any risks; he has been responsible for a film that never goes beyond the expectations of the fans, who are not the best people to aim for when making a good film.

The other problem is that an origin story is not inherently dramatic unless it's part of a larger story – watching a film where we've already seen three films in the character's future (and the fact that they treat Wolverine as practically immortal, thus eliminating any excitement) means that there has to be something else to care about in the narrative. Otherwise, the film suffers from the tedious and unnecessary tendency of comic books to tie up all elements of any story in a tidy fictional package, connecting all disparate points, dotting the i's and crossing the t's to the extent that it becomes an exercise in continuity masturbation.

The film is essentially the gist of the Origin storyline (Logan kills his dad with his bone claws for the first time) and the Weapon X storyline (Logan gets his adamantium skeleton and claws) with a connecting storyline. The Origin bit happens pre-credits (which is about as important as it should be – I always thought that it was a stupid story [LINK], because Wolverine works best with a mysterious background, but also because the story was rubbish and it only came into being because Marvel decided they had to do it before Hollywood botched it up. Also, the bone claws – really, really, REALLY stupid idea. The credit sequence is actually nicely done – covering Wolverine and Sabretooth's time fighting in wars together (Civil, the First and Second World Wars, Vietnam) before Stryker offers them a position on Team X, doing nasty things for the government, before he finally decides he has enough, and he turns into Lumberjack Wolverine with Kayla Silverfox in the Canadian Rockies. Of course, things can't stay that way, and Logan gets back in with Stryker after Sabretooth starts killing the old members of Weapon X and then Silverfox. When he gets the adamantium bonded to him, things don't turn out quite as smooth as expected, and Wolverine must unleash the animal within.

Good things: Jackman is good as Wolverine; he's pumped up and channels the rage, and he's also charismatic and carries the film. Liev Schreiber as Sabretooth is great – he exudes animal rage and power (even if the extending nails are rather silly. Ryan Reynolds in the few minutes on screen as Wade Wilson is hilarious and looks fantastic – can we get a Reynolds-starring Deadpool film ASAP? The direction of the film is handled well by Gavin Hood, with his first time on a blockbuster, giving the feel of the film a sheen of 1970s style. There are nice touches for the fans (the old couple who find him after he escapes from the Weapon X facility are called the Hudsons, the wife is called Heather) but, the film tries too hard to cater for the fanboys, including providing a reason why Wolverine has no memory when he joins the X-Men (adamantium bullets? Really? He's a healer and you've covered him with an indestructible metal, and that's the best you can come up with?), as well as cameos for Emma Frost and Cyclops for no particularly good reason whatsoever. It's just too much fanboy service and not enough in the service of a good film – even with the piracy, it was always a sure bet that the geeks would give the film a boffo opening weekend, but the returns are going to be low after that because the word of mouth will not see this through afterwards. Which is a great shame, because I wanted this to be good and give Jackman a chance to step up to the big leagues. When asked if I would buy this on DVD when it came out, I said no – which saddens me no end.

Jackman described the illegally leaked copy like 'a Ferrari without the paint job' – based on the final film, he would be lucky to have a decent Toyota.

Rating: VID

Comics I Bought 30 April 2009

Tomorrow is Free Comic Book Day but it tends to be more for the US than the UK – the amount paid for shipping the free books over here tends to negate the point of the day. I mention this, apart from bigging up the annual celebration of comic books, because the shipping of comics to the UK affected this week's purchases: Ignition City #2 failed to ship here yet again. Diamond seem to have it in for us – they won't let us enjoy the dark and twisted humour of Warren Ellis, mainly because they can't be bothered (at least, according to the chaps at Gosh!, the best comic shop in the world). This means that I only bought one comic book this week, hence the slightly longer than normal introductory paragraph than normal.

The Literals #1
I can't think of a crossover where a mini-series was created to be the third corner of the triangle of books in the crossover, nor where a new issue one was the third part in the crossover. You've got to give Willingham and Sturges credit for doing something different. This issue deals with the actual reason for the crossover: Kevin Thorn, a Literal with the power to rewrite the universe with his magic quill. When we see him, he seems to be accompanied by a drooling man in a straitjacket: is it Kevin in reality? They both wear glasses. Is he the flip side to the writer as an entity? A dribbling idiot with no point to their life? Kevin wanders around, writing in his notebook, trying to rewrite the universe – except he's got writer's block. He invites the 'family' over – the Genres (who, even though they're supposed to represent the written word, are all represented by cinematic ideals: Western is John Wayne, Blockbuster is Arnold Schwarzenegger, Comedy is Groucho Marx, Noir is Humphrey Bogart. Contradictory, no?) However, they can't help, so he brings along his most inspired creations (are we supposed to recognise them?) to inspire him.

Elsewhere, Bigby, Snow, Gary and Mr Revise are trying to track down Thorn (which also entails the only woman being a bad driver, which I thought was something we were beyond now), nearly getting blown up at Thorn's home in Manhattan before Thorn discovers their quest and rewrites Bigby ... There is also two pages of Jack Frost, Jack's son, who meets a man with a sword through his chest (are we supposed to know him as well?) The book finishes with a six-panel page of somebody ordering lots of food at the diner from the previous issue – is it supposed to be funny? Isn't it a bit of a waste? The book itself seems odd – why does it exist? Couldn't they tell the story in the two ongoing series? If Buckingham can draw this book, which he does well as usual, why the need for another book? It even seems to ignore the advice of the title of the chapter: 'Start as deep in the story as you can'. It seems to meander and take its time to get to a point – Thorn is powerful and a bit mad: what happens next? I hope things pick up in the next instalment.