Surely, She Jests.

Harley Quinn (aka Harlequin, aka Dr. Harleen Quinzel) is one of my favorite DC characters because she's so colorful and off-the-wall.  She's a former psychiatrist who turns to crime and falls in love with the Joker.  What a concept!  A love interest for Joker?  Who'd have ever thought anyone could fall in love with a pasty whackjob like him?  It was a bizarre love story 50 years in the making. 

I wasn't reading comics when Harley was given her first solo monthly series from 2001-2003, but I was fortunate to have been around when Gotham City Sirens was published from 2009-2011, a series starring Harley, Poison Ivy, and Catwoman.  It was a decent series and it humanized Harley, showing us her friendship/kinship with other women, especially her closeness to Pamela (Poison Ivy).  It also portrayed her as in between a hero and a villain, much like Catwoman. 

Unfortunately, there seems to have been a lot of inconsistency in developing Harley's character/personality over the years.  With DC Comics' New 52 reboot, Harley has another new, more violent personality; she's a member of the Suicide Squad; and she's wearing a much different costume.  She's also a lot more methodical and serious, which is kind of disappointing because her goofiness, innocence, and naivety were her biggest appealing qualities and what set her apart from other villainesses.  And, although I like the idea of her new costume, I think it could be a lot less skimpy/slutty.  Her former costume was head-to-toe covering, which seemed a little silly (like her), but the slutty look is a bit too extreme, too.  She's not Harley anymore, and she doesn't have that personality that would make me think she'd fall in love with the Joker.  

Now, in late 2013, Harley is being given a chance at a second solo monthly series.   DC Comics recently released Harley Quinn #0.  What should have been an origin story was kind of a throwaway issue.  It featured Harley breaking the fourth wall (like John Byrne successfully did with She-Hulk back in the 1980s) and going from scene to scene, but there didn't feel like there was any flow or story whatsoever.  It was basically a showcase for different artists.  A multitude of artists contributed to the issue, with the supposed hunt for a permanent artist for the series. Why Amanda Conner (one of the co-writers) doesn't illustrate it, I have no idea.  She did an AMAZING job with Before Watchmen's Silk Spectre, and it's evident from her cover art that she could produce a beautiful Harley Quinn comic. 

Anyway, I look forward to reading Harley's misadventures in her own comic outside of Suicide Squad, but I hope the zero issue wasn't any indication of how future issues will be.  Harley and her readers deserve better. 

Injustice Does Justice to the Justice League

I just finished reading the hardcover compilation of Injustice: Gods Among Us, Vol. 1.  It collects the first six issues of the Injustice: Gods Among Us series.  The story is very well-written by Tom Taylor and beautifully illustrated by Jheremy Raapack.  The hardcover that collects the first six issues is attractive itself, too.  I was very impressed by the initial presentation, and then became so thoroughly engaged with the storyline that I read all six issues within the book quickly.   

The series is based on the video game (which I've never played) and serves as a prequel to the events in the game.  The story involves the division of members of the Justice League into two "teams" going up against one another; one led by Superman, one led by Batman.  Superman and his followers want to right the wrongs in the world by any means (Machiavelli's "the end justifies the means" philosophy).   Batman, on the other hand, wants to right the wrongs within legal confines, using the established (albeit broken) justice system.  I won't reveal any spoilers, but I will say that the writer does a fantastic job of not only keeping the story moving, but also with developing each character's personality.   

The real injustice here is that Injustice: Gods Among Us takes place outside of the current DC Universe because this storyline is SO much better than Justice League stories currently being written in the New 52. What a shame that the talents of Taylor and Raapack are being wasted by not giving them a regular monthly series that takes place within the confines of the New 52 and delivers powerful stories with attention to characterization.  Instead, we're stuck with bland writers like Ann Nocenti.  Taylor also wrote the brilliant Rose and Thorn one-shot which was also a favorite of mine.  So, kudos to Taylor on his awesome writing skills. 

And the art in Injustice is so amazing and lifelike, too!   I've rarely seen superheroes like Superman or Wonder Woman look better (although I'm not sure why Lois Lane is a redhead).  

I look forward to reading the new ongoing Injustice series and (hopefully) watching the careers of Taylor and Raapack fluorish.  

Up and Atom

X-Men: Battle of the Atom #1

I just finished reading all ten chapters of the X-Men crossover story "Battle of the Atom."  It was a nod to Chris Claremont and John Byrne's "Days of Future Past" storyline that ran in Uncanny X-Men #141 and #142 in 1981, just in time to give some more attention to the upcoming 2014 X-Men: Days of Future Past film.  There's a lot of time-traveling in "Battle of the Atom."  The original five teenage X-Men have already come from the past into present day (the concept for the All-New X-Men comic), and now the X-Men from the future travel back to present day in an effort to send them back to their original time period.  Got all that?  At one point, there are three different Icemen and three different Beasts.  What this has to do with atoms is anyone's guess.  But it's a pretty cool title (and logo) nonetheless.

Marvel did a good job of labeling each chapter in the story so readers wouldn't have to figure out what order to read the comics in.  The downside was that if you didn't currently read all of the X-titles, you were pretty much forced to buy all of them to fully understand what's going on.  There was little to no distinction with the characters from book to book.  For example, if you currently only read Wolverine and the X-Men, you didn't get a story featuring the title's regular characters.  You got the next chapter of the "Battle of the Atom" storyline, most likely featuring the original five teenage X-Men and/or their future counterparts.  Bookending the storyline was a two-issue X-Men: Battle of the Atom limited series.

X-Men #5

The most confusing aspect was figuring out which title you were reading at any given moment.  All of the X-titles use the same font for their logos, and they all had the same yellow border.  There was little to distinguish them from one another.  It was especially confusing when it came to the regular monthly simply titled X-Men comic vs. the limited series X-Men: Battle of the Atom comic.  (See images above and to the right.  One is the regular X-Men title and the other is the limited series, but they both have "X-Men" and "Battle of the Atom" on their covers.  Splitting up the words doesn't really make it less confusing.) 

Like most of Marvel's major "events" of late, nothing really dramatic or drastic occurs at the conclusion of "Battle of the Atom."  Some may disagree, but to me it's nothing when compared to crossover events like Marvel's Secret Wars in 1984 that gave us Spider-Man's new black costume or the She-Hulk replacing long-time Fantastic Four member The Thing while he stays on Battleworld in his own monthly series.  Or even when compared to House of M when the Scarlet Witch declared "No More Mutants."  And it's certainly nothing like DC's Crisis on Infinite Earths or Flashpoint that changed things "forever" in the DC Universe.  

Uncanny X-Men #139

Was it good, though?  Sure. It was actually much better than the X-Men crossover stories over the past several years (e.g., "Nation X," "Necrosha," "Second Coming," or "Age of X," just to name a few).   It would just be nice that when an X-Men or Avengers crossover arc is said and done, everyone goes back to ONE team/book.  Wolverine does not need to appear in every X-book.  Iron Man and Thor don't need to appear in every Avengers title. Mr. Fantastic shouldn't be both an Avenger and a member of the Fantastic Four.  There.  I said it.  I couldn't even tell you who's on what team because everyone just appears everywhere in the Marvel Universe.  I don't know when they even have time to poop.  It would make me more excited about purchasing a certain comic if I knew particular characters were going to appear in there every month.  For example, where can I read about Kitty Pryde?  Who knows?  Uncanny X-Men?  X-Men?  All-New X-Men?  Wolverine and the X-Men?  The answer would be:  YES. And NO. It just depends.  When we do see glimpses of her, is it anything like her character development in the 1980s in the ONE X-title of the day, Uncanny X-Men?  NO.  She's just another (intangible) warm body.  I really miss good storytelling and character development/interaction.   Some may think that Scott Summers and Jean Grey are the Ross and Rachel of the X-Men world.  To me, it will always be Kitty Pryde and Peter Rasputin.  He'll always be her lobster.  

A Villain's Beauty is Only Skin Deep

Another DC Comics' villains month has come and gone.  After DC Comics' Faces of Evil concept disappointed me in 2009, I had low expectations for the latest villains month event/gimmick in September 2013.  Then came all the hype and positive reviews for the 3-D lenticular covers, the news of their limited availability, and the mad dash to collect them all, even if it meant spending ten to one-hundred times their "value" on eBay (see The Joker's Daughter #1).  

Fortunately, all of mine came pre-ordered, so I wasn't involved with all of the hair-pulling and name-calling. My monthly shipment comics arrived at the end of September, and I was mesmerized by the covers.  They really were pretty awesome.  I've almost finished reading all of them and all I have to say is that their beauty is only skin deep.  Some are origin stories.  Some are present-day stories.  Pretty much all of them, though, have been average storytelling.  There was no consistency or cohesiveness to them.  It would have been better if they were either (a) all origin stories set in the past or (b) all set in the present-day New 52 world.  The only good thing about them is that there has been some decent artwork from artists I've never heard of before. 

Two of the most interesting villains issues I've read so far have been Poison Ivy #1 and Killer Croc #1.  Both are set in present day with flashbacks to when they were young.  Both present terrible events in their childhoods that give us insight into why they've become the villains they are today.  I felt sympathetic toward them; the events humanized them.  Additionally, the Poison Ivy comic did something very creative with its flashbacks.  It presented the art with an old-timey look in pastel colors.  This is the kind of comic I'd love to see blossom into a regular series, as it really gives us an in-depth look into the life of Pamela Isley.  

Conversely, my most anticipated read, The Joker's Daughter #1, was a complete letdown, thanks mostly in part to writer Ann Nocenti's inability to actually, um, write. Nocenti's already killed Green Arrow, Katana, and Catwoman for me.  So, let's give her another title and see what else she can fuck up.  Does she have some sort of blackmail against DC Comics' Powers-That-Be that keeps landing her regular gigs?  What should have been an introduction to a new, reinvented, creepy character just turned out to be a big, convoluted mess.  Don't just take my word for it, though.  

Maybe one year DC will actually get a Villains Month right.   What a wonderful month it would be to have dazzling covers mixed with well-written stories and terrific artwork.  But, seriously, why limit it to a month?   Shouldn't we always get these things for our hard-earned dollars?  With the abundance of untapped talent that's out there, why waste time on spotty storytelling and crappy art? 

The Dawn of the Dead Archies

Archie comics have always been known for their child-like content, so in recent years, it's been interesting to see Archie Comics test the waters with more adult-oriented subject matter.  For example, there was the introduction of a new gay teenager at Riverdale High: Kevin Keller. There was also the "Archie Marries Veronica" and "Archie Marries Betty" storylines with adult versions of the popular teen characters.  These storylines in the regular Archie comic were so popular that they were given their own magazine, reviving the Life with Archie title.  

Now Archie is branching out into zombiedom.  That's right, you heard me.  Archie has just launched the new Afterlife with Archie monthly series.  Get it?  I just read the first issue.  This is definitely not your typical Archie comic.  It's not even your Life with Archie magazine.  It's basically a horror movie with the Archie characters substituting for the obligatory chased teens. 

***SPOILER ALERT!!***

Issue #1 opens with a very serious (out of character) Jughead coming to Archie with his dog, Hot Dog, dead in his arms.  Okay, I can take the Archie characters being dead (or undead), but do they have to kill the loveable dog?  It was a pretty jarring way to start the story and I immediately felt uneasy.  Then it takes a Pet Sematary-esque turn.  Archie suggests to Jughead that he bury Hot Dog.  Here, it's a little too much like a rip-off of Stephen King's Pet Sematary.  The writer even goes so far as to take at least two lines from the book/movie and use them word for word in the comic book dialogue between Archie and Jughead!  While its intent may have been reverence, it just feels like plagiarism.  Later, we see a distraught Reggie confess to Archie that he was the one who accidentally hit Hot Dog with his car, while Sabrina (the teenage witch) helps Jughead bury Hot Dog using a reincarnation spell.  

I'm not sure what I was expecting from this strange take on the Archie characters, but this certainly wasn't it.  Coming from the Archie brand, I thought it would be more "fun."  Even Betty and Veronica weren't recognizable as themselves (pre-Zombie), so I don't know why they had to use the Archie characters other than as a marketing tactic.  The art is acceptable for a comic in this genre, but not for Archie characters.  I wouldn't have known who was who if it wasn't for their hair color/style (Archie, Betty, Veronica), head piece (Jughead), or someone using their name while speaking to them (Reggie, Sabrina) or about them (Hot Dog). 

While others may enjoy Archie's foray into the undead, I guess Afterlife with Archie isn't my cup of milkshake. 

Superman. Wonder Woman. Love. Fight.

I'm not quite sure why it was necessary to have a new book featuring Superman and Wonder Woman called Superman/Wonder Woman.  They could have easily just made guest appearances in each other's solo books.  Regardless, I bought the first issue because Wonder Woman is one of my favorite characters (even though I haven't loved her solo book since George Perez' take on it), and I was curious about the romance between the two superheroes.  

First, I wish they could have come up with a better title.  Really?  That's the best they could do?  Not even Superman and Wonder Woman.  No.  It's Superman/Wonder Woman.  Equally dumb as Batman/Superman, Superman/Batman, or whatever the fuck the title is now.  

Now, onto the story.  Superman/Wonder Woman #1 had a decent plot and artwork to it.  In fact, it was probably even better than both heroes' individual monthly series.  That's not saying a whole heck of a lot, though, because their monthly series are both pretty...average.  I don't look at my monthly stack of comics and say, "Oooh...let me read Superman or Wonder Woman first!"  No, typically, they'll each sit around for a few months building up, and then I'll finally read those back-to-back issues in one sitting.  

What I liked best about the new series so far is that we get to see Clark and Diana without their costumes as they attempt to go on a date, even though it's quickly interrupted by an emergency (Isn't that always the case?).  While I enjoy the attempt at some character development outside the realm of superherodom, I don't think this first issue offered enough.  I don't really feel the attraction between the two.  Just why are these two attracted to each other?  Other than probably physically?  Or maybe that's just it.  They'll get it out of their systems and then move on. It's obvious (even in this issue) that their personalities are very different (thanks to the new versions of these iconic heroes in the New 52!), so I'm not sure what they really share in common personality-wise. 

Is this comic worth the $3.99 price tag?  Not yet.  The story itself was pretty short with large panels of art, so not much happened.  DC needs to offer more to keep me as a reader on this title.  I already dropped Action Comics, Detective Comics, and Batman/Superman/Superman/Batman because the quality of the stories didn't measure up to the $3.99 price tag.  Why pay $3.99 when I can get comics for $2.99 with the same characters? 

Green Arrow Misses The Target

When I was a teenager/young adult, Green Arrow was one of my favorite comic book series.  I'm sure it was in large part to the tremendous writing on the series from Mike Grell.  In fact, it was so good that it prompted me to write in with compliments (and have my letters published!) a few times.  Although it resided within the DC Universe, its stories stood apart from the rest of Earth One's superheroes.  They were a lot more than just battle sequences, which frequently get boring.  It involved Green Arrow/Oliver Queen's relationship with Dinah Lance/Black Canary, their flower shop Sherwood Florist in Seattle, Dinah's rape, Oliver's infidelity with Shado and the resulting son, etc.

When I started reading comics again in 2007, one of the series I decided to pick up was Green Arrow & Black Canary, to see what was going on with two of my favorite characters.  To my surprise, Oliver Queen wasn't the Green Arrow of the series.  His son Connor Hawke was.  I had never heard of Connor Hawke.  So Ollie had another kid out of wedlock...and it still wasn't with Dinah?  Sheesh.  Apparently, Ollie didn't believe in any form of birth control. 

Fortunately, soon into the Green Arrow & Black Canary series, Ollie returns to claim his rightful title.  I went and bought all of the back issues of wedding issues and specials to see what I missed.  I really liked this new team series.  It was fun and entertaining.  I even liked seeing Connor Hawke and the new Speedy, Mia Dearden, appear regularly.  They made a great foursome.  Then came the introduction of Cupid.  She was an interesting villain/character at first, but when she started appearing in EVERY issue, that's when my interest started to wane. Who was this series about anyway?  Green Arrow and Black Canary...or Cupid?  DC saw declining sales and so changed the focus (and title) of the book to only Green Arrow.  (Even I could have told them it was not because of Black Canary, but because of stupid Cupid.)  That's when Green Arrow started being serious again, with the killing of Prometheus and running off into the magical forest that once was Star City, following the events of Blackest Night.  The new Green Arrow solo series labeled with the Brightest Day banner was interesting, but I missed the fun of the early Green Arrow & Black Canary issues, and I missed seeing Ollie and Dinah together as a couple. 

Then came the infamous New 52 following Flashpoint.  Oliver Queen is now a young man (a boy, if you will).  He has no facial hair and, as far as I know, has never even met Dinah Lance!  [GASP!  The horrors!]  Because I like Green Arrow in concept, I've read the first 24 issues of the latest Green Arrow series (volume 4 of his solo series titles; volume 5 if you include Green Arrow & Black Canary).  I can honestly say that I don't think I've truly enjoyed a single issue.  Like most, though, I didn't attribute my initial dislike to the writing of J.T. Krul at the beginning of the series.  I think he did the best with what he had to work with, which wasn't much.  Following Krul's dismissal, DC turned over the reigns to Ann Nocenti.  That's when I came to discover that Nocenti is one of the worst comic book writers out there.  I realize she's been writing for many, many, many years, but maybe it's time to force her retirement.  Her storytelling is awful; her dialogue is worse.  And now she's dragging down Catwoman and Katana with her.  In fact, the solo Katana series has already been canceled.  Coincidence?  I think not.  Catwoman's sure to be on the chopping block next.  And don't even get me started about the disappointment with The Joker's Daughter #1.  Seriously...WTF was that about anyway?  Another lame reintroduction to another potential star (see: Amethyst). 

So I was thrilled that DC execs finally came to their senses and moved Nocenti off Green Arrow, giving the series to writer Jeff Lemire (Animal Man).  Sadly, the series is still too boring for me, featuring too many battle sequences and not enough characterization and character interaction/relationships.  I miss the days when Oliver Queen was a man (a sexy man at that), when he had a history and relationship with Dinah Lance/Black Canary, had a strong friendship with Hal Jorden/Green Lantern, had a bunch of rugrats from different babymamas, had a sense of humor, was a strong Democrat, and fought for the little people.   Now he's just this dopey boy who used to have a company similar to Apple and runs around with two associates who create his arrows and buzz in his ear.  Even the reintroduction of Count Vertigo was short-lived and lame.  And now, Ollie's just met the Shado of the New 52 Universe who had a child...from his father.  EW.  

So, I'm done.  For the first time in many, many years, Green Arrow is no longer on my monthly pull list.  It was a good run, but I can't stand to see a good character unnecessarily spin out of control, even where Count Vertigo is involved. 

Santa Claws

Let's face it:  Wolverine is everywhere.  Not only does he have two of his own solo comic book series (Wolverine and Savage Wolverine) but he's also a member of several X-teams and Avengers teams, plus appears in the other self-titled Wolverine and the X-Men (and these don't even include the alternate versions of him in the Ultimate Universe or Wolverine: MAX).  It's especially -- for lack of a better word -- interesting when the storylines don't even intersect.  He can be in outer space with the Avengers, fighting solo in Madripoor, taking on Sentinels with the X-Men in New York, or just sometimes...DEAD in hell.  ALL AT THE SAME TIME.  Now, one man cannot seriously be in all of these places at once.  So, naturally, I've come to the conclusion that, like Santa Claus, there must be several actors playing the Wolverine character (or, as I like to call him, Santa Claws) in order to make this a reality.  I'm waiting for the day when Marvel comes out with Wolverine, Inc. with all of the Wolverines from around the world and across the galaxy and puts them all in one double-sized, bi-monthly comic. 

I hate to sound like that grumpy old man in the corner that people talk about, but I remember when there was ONE Wolverine and he appeared in Uncanny X-Men.  Period.  And we liked it.  Then in 1982 he got his very own mini-series.  And we loved it.  Then he finally got his very own monthly series in 1988.  And there was a collective "Meh."  I read it for a few issues, got bored, and removed it from my pull list.  

In 2013, we now have his fourth solo self-titled series, so I decided to give him another try.  I enjoyed Paul Cornell's take on Lex Luthor in Action Comics, so I looked forward to what he was going to do scripting Wolverine.  After reading several issues of the new series, I've been less than impressed.  There's little characterization.  It's just Wolverine doing what he does best: fighting.  There's no emotion in the comics.  The storylines are otherworldly.  And there's no personal connection for the reader.  Maybe Cornell had a ghost writer for Lex Luthor?  Frankly, any generic writer who has no background in comic book characters could have written the first several issues of the latest incarnation of Wolverine.  And what's with all of the guest stars, from Nick Fury to S.H.I.E.L.D. to Black Panther to other X-Men?  If Marvel is worried that Wolverine can't carry his own series, then why give him a series?   I already see Wolverine interacting with several different characters in several different monthly comic books.  Shouldn't a solo title be focused on his experiences exclusive of others in the Marvel Universe, a la Hawkeye?

I haven't even picked up an issue of Savage Wolverine.  Why?  I'm already oversaturated with Wolverine in EVERY comic book and, to be honest, with that much exposure he just becomes boring.  Yes, I said it.  Wolverine now bores me.  How about getting back to basics with Wolverine?  Giving him stories that really bring out and develop his personality?  There's so much depth to him, but all anyone wants to use him for is being the angry guy and slicing up people and things.  He's Marvel's cash cow, so they figure that just by throwing him in every comic he'll generate increased revenue.  

Wolverine deserves better.  He deserves to be properly explored with excellent written stories, and he deserves to be illustrated with excellent artwork, neither of which he's gotten in a long, long time.  Most of all, he deserves to be given to readers in smaller, natural quality doses, not shoved down our throats like gallons of artificial High Fructose Corn Syrup. 

Judging Books by their Covers

I've been looking through my comics collection from when I was a kid and young adult.  Over about a 15-year span, I amassed a huge collection of comics and kept them neatly organized in boxes.  All of my weekly allowance went toward comics, not to mention my entire paycheck when I worked part-time at a comic book store for a year.  Plus there was Christmas and birthday money.  These sometimes went toward older comics at comic book conventions.  

There are literally 30 long comic boxes full of individually bagged comics from that period of my life.  That's thousands of comics!  I've been going through them so I can sell them on eBay, cataloging them and taking photographs of individual comics and/or sets of comics.  It's been quite a monumental task to say the least.  But that's actually been the easy part.  The most time-consuming part has been rating their condition, reviewing their value, writing eBay descriptions for each one, and coming up with a fair price. 

While I've been doing this, I've glanced at the photos I've taken, remembering the stand-out issues.  Their covers really meant something to me at the time, and they still hold a special place in my memories.  There are so many classic covers that remind me of a different time, and are so meaningful or works of art that they give me pause.  They may not be considered "classic" in the traditional sense, such as Fantastic Four #1 from 1961 or Crisis on Infinite Earths #7 from 1985, but to me they're classic because I had/have a special affinity for them.  

It made me realize that a lot of comic book covers today don't "grab" me.  There's nothing unique or special about most of them.  I couldn't tell you much about the contents under the cover, and I couldn't tell you, "Oh, that's issue #213."  Mainly because the cover doesn't tell me anything or strike an emotional cord with me, but also sometimes because DC and Marvel restart their comics every other year, never allowing them to even get into triple digits anymore.  (Wink wink, DC New 52 and Marvel NOW!)

Take for example these two Uncanny X-Men comics.  One is from 1980, the other from today (2013).  The one on the left tells me that Kitty Pryde joins the X-men -- yay!  It makes me want to read it right away.  The one on the right tells me...nothing.   It gives me a generic team action pose.  If I didn't already read the poorly illustrated comic on a monthly basis, what incentive would I have to pick up this comic if I saw it on a shelf next to other comics? 

As a side note, comparing these two issues: it irks me that Marvel is putting the comic titles and numbers at the bottom of their comics now (or is it NOW!)?.  Don't they realize how hard that makes it for comic book shops and customers to find comics on a shelf when the pertinent information is tucked behind other stacked comics?  Or for collectors when the comics are safely stored away in comic boxes?  You actually have to lift up the comics all the way to see what the titles and numbers are, instead of quickly glancing the shelves or flipping through a box.  It's really poor marketing, and for a company now owned by Disney who's known for their brand and retail marketing, it's pretty shameful. 

Much like the fashion industry magazines, DC Comics has taken over September as their month to do something spectacular.  It all started with the New 52 in September 2011, continued with Zero Month in September 2012, and just recently DC Comics took another stab at a Villains Month for September 2013.  The New 52 was a new concept, but Zero Month was a rehash of a comic marketing stunt that DC pulled in 1994 in conjunction with their Zero Hour crossover event.  Villains Month, too, is a rehash of a marketing stunt, but only dating back to 2009 when they did their (lame) Faces of Evil event.  When I first learned of the latest attempt at Villains Month, I thought, "Oy vey," and I'm not even Jewish.

Instead of visiting a local comic book store, I order my comics online now, about three months in advance.  They arrive once monthly in a well-packaged box, complete with bags and boards.  All that's left to do is read them...and I can manage that!  

In June 2013, I saw the DC Comics listing for September and thought, "Are you freakin' kidding me?"  Every issue was listed at $3.99.  What a joke!  I wasn't even aware of any special 3-D covers at the time.  Or maybe they never mentioned it either.  Or maybe I just thought it was another stupid stunt like hologram issues in the 1990s.  I remembered back to Faces of Evil in 2009 and thought (in the words of our former [cough!] inspirational [cough, cough!] leader), "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again."  Although I didn't buy ALL of the issues, I did manage to purchase a great majority of them, increasing my monthly expenditure by 50%.  

Like a monthly menstrual cycle, my box of September comics arrived via UPS yesterday as scheduled.  In it were all of the DC Comics with lenticular 3-D covers.  (Did anyone even know what lenticular meant before these comics created such a buzz?  Chalk one up for DC for expanding America's vocabulary.)  

I usually file the comics away alphabetically in a box to read before moving them into their regular comic boxes.  (Hello, OCD!)  It took me much longer to do last night than usual because I was in awe at how beautiful the covers were.  They're all so colorful and so full of...life.  This was truly a great marketing stunt, and -- I hate to admit it -- worth the $3.99 each (these .gifs shown don't even do them justice).  I even felt disappointed that I didn't preorder ALL 3-D issues, and I don't even read on a regular basis such comics as Green Lantern, Flash, or Swamp Thing.  I just wanted to look at ALL of them.  This was the first time in a long time that a comic book cover truly caught my eye.  They may not go down in history as "classic" covers, but they're damn nice to look at.  Shame on DC for not printing enough so every fan who wanted one could get one, though.  

Now, I can't review them for their content yet, because I haven't read any of them yet (I'm afraid I'll destroy their beauty!).  For now, I'm judging these books by their covers. 

Uncanny X-Men Volume 3: Hope It Survives The Experience

Growing up, I built up my vocabulary of adjectives by reading comic books:  Amazing. Astonish. Impossible. Incredible. Invincible. Fantastic. Mighty. Savage. Sensational. Uncanny.  

The strangest one being, of course, uncanny.  Which, ironically, means strange.  Did that mean it was the opposite of canny?  And what did canny mean?  Apparently, it means clever or shrewd, so I'm not sure how something strange, eerie, or mysterious is the opposite of clever or shrewd. 

Anyway, remember when only one superhero team was uncanny?  And remember when there was only ONE X-Men comic?  It's hard to conceive of now.  Now, there are three uncanny teams: Avengers, X-Force, and X-Men.  It kind of lessens the uniqueness and impact of the word, the team, and the comic, doesn't it?

The original Uncanny X-Men series ran for an -- get ready for it -- astonishing 544 issues.  That's pretty long for a comic book series.  Of course, following DC's restart of all their long-running series (including Action Comics, Detective Comics, Batman, Superman, and Wonder Woman), Marvel decided it was time to restart their long-running series as well.  Following the "schism" between Cyclops and Wolverine seemed like the perfect opportunity.   It also allowed for the entry of another X-Men comic (Wolverine and the X-Men).  And not only another X-Men comic, but an X-Men comic starring Wolverine.  (He's one busy fella!)

Sadly, volume two of The Uncanny X-Men only lasted for 20 issues.  Then along comes
Brian Michael Bendis and the Marvel NOW! initiative.  I'm sure the conversation went down something like this:

Marvel: "We'd like you to write the X-Men." 
Bendis: "Okay, but only if I can start with a #1 issue."
Marvel: "But we just restarted the Uncanny X-Men after 50 years."
Bendis: "I don't care.  Take it or leave it." 
Marvel: "Sigh... Okay.  Let's axe volume two and start all over again."
Bendis: "Deal." 

Now came volume three in 2013.  Hopefully this one will last significantly longer than volume two.  Unless, of course, Bendis leaves and Marvel wants another high-profile writer to take over who has high demands. 

The current Uncanny X-Men features Cyclops, Emma Frost, Magneto, Magik, and a bunch of new young "students."  Cyclops sports a new costume with a headpiece that really reinforces his codename's namesake (although his costume looks too similar to DC's new Superboy costume, which itself is too Tron-like for my taste).  Emma Frost sports a new, all-black costume, thus reinforcing the idea that she is no longer the Hellfire Club's White Queen (but how about a new codename?).  And I'm not sure what's up with Magneto's new look.  Wearing a white and black costume that resembles the Punisher's?  Bald?  I'm not loving Emma's or Magneto's new costumes.  

Now let's talk about artwork.  Chris Bachalo's art is a bit unflattering to the characters.  It's very rough-looking, and it certainly doesn't bring out Emma Frost's sexiness in the least.  And because nobody's costume is very distinguishable and the artwork is a bit sloppy, I sometimes can't tell if the woman in a panel is Emma, Magik, or one of the Stepford Cuckoos without some additional clues.  And don't even get me started on the new characters.  Who's who?  Who knows? They all look too similar.  Is that Rogue?  No, it's a new student who also has a white streak of hair.  Really?  The entire book is very dark, too.  There's no real color to it; just shades of black and gold, which makes it doubly difficult to decipher between characters.  Visually, the entire book just isn't very appealing to me.

I'm still reading the book, though, because Cyclops and Emma Frost are two of my favorite characters (even though they've gone through some pretty drastic changes over the years).  And Bendis does provide good dialogue between the characters, even though the characterization isn't optimal.  Are those the personalities we know?  Are these people always in costume and running around?  Do they ever do anything else? What about their private lives? 

A great, new recent addition to the comic is the underutilized Dazzler.  She's now an agent for S.H.I.E.L.D., but her costume is very new Fantastic Four and Magneto-esque.  Unfortunately, she, too, is pretty indistinguishable from the blond-haired Emma, Magik, and the Stepford Cuckoos.  In fact, when she first appeared, I didn't even know who she was until someone spoke her name.  Why not make characters more recognizable?   Isn't that the point of distinguishable costumes?  Readers should be able to instantly recognize their favorite heroes or villains, no matter which artist is drawing them.  She, too, doesn't seem to be very Dazzler-like in her characterization.  Does Bendis need some Cliff Notes on each of the team's members?

Let's hope that Marvel can one day bring its flagship X-Men title up to the level in which it was in the 1980s, quality-wise.  It has a lot to live up to.  Welcome to Uncanny X-Men, Volume 3, hope you survive the experience.

 

My Annual Dilemma

Comic book annuals used to be something exciting that were "must haves" because they featured the debut of a new character (Rogue in Avengers Annual #10 from 1981), featured a big reveal (Jade and Obsidian discover their mother is Rose/Thorn in Infinity Inc. Annual #1 from 1985), or wrapped up an important storyline ("The Judas Contract" finale in Tales of the Teen Titans Annual #3 from 1984).  They also used to be annual.

  
I think the big two comic companies have lost sight of the purposes for annuals.  They're not just to increase sales in the summertime.  They're supposed to give the readers something in return, too.  I used to look forward to DC's and Marvel's annuals.  Now they just feel like a huge waste of money.  $5+ for a comic in which they test out on me new writers with bland, generic stories and artists with dubious art?  No thanks. 

I've been reading the "Zero Year" storyline in DC's New 52 Batman series.  Unfortunately, I've been less than impressed.  So when I saw that the latest Batman Annual #2 (2013) also featured part of the storyline, new writer Marguerite Bennett, and about 16 different artists, my first impression was, "Ugh."  What happened to quality storytelling?  What happened to consistency in artwork throughout one freakin' comic book?  Those were questions I asked myself as I set aside some extra time and waded reluctantly into Batman Annual #2.  

As I began to read it, I was quick to note that the dialogue was very appealing.  It didn't feel amateurish, forced, or untrue to character (hello, Felicia Henderson).  It wasn't full of crappy action scenes with no direction or plot.  I didn't even notice the changes in artists.  Everything felt seamless.  And I was actually drawn into the story and into Arkham Asylum, where the entire story takes place.  The introduction, history, and character of the Anchoress, Arkham's longest resident, was intriguing as well.  I think Bennett did a wonderful job, and I'm actually a bit green with envy.  (I overlooked the fact that this woman who looked like a frail 90-year-old was holding her own against Batman.) 

Batman Annual #2 gives me hope in summertime annuals again.

Still Hungry for More...NOW.

I'm still scratching my head, trying to figure out what the big deal was about the Age of Ultron limited series.   I was prepared (and excited) for something colossal to happen.  What I got was a mishmash of storylines and characters.  There was no cohesion.  Every issue featured different characters.  And issue #10 was so "top secret" that it had to come in a sealed polybag?  So they saved the universe from Ultron's threat by changing the timestream.  And...the big revelation is bringing some scantily clad chick named Angela over from Image Comics' Spawn series?  Meh.  Even Flashpoint was more interesting, and I hate what that did to the DC Universe.

Figuring it was a tie-in to the conclusion, I pre-ordered what was previously listed as Age of Ultron #10UC before Marvel changed the title to Hunger.  Wow.  What an idiot I am.  As hinted at, it *does* feature Galactus (just a tiny bit), but it's mostly about teenage punk Rick Jones from Marvel's Ultimate Universe, which I don't even read.  

Because I've always been a fan of the Vision (especially when he and Scarlet Witch were a couple in the 1980s), I also picked up Avengers A.I., thinking a team full of robot-like characters sounded pretty interesting and something unique.  Sadly, the first issue was pretty disappointing because it was extremely...average.  I didn't care about any of the characters (even Vision who wasn't even in the story enough, being that he's probably the biggest draw). 

Age of Ultron (and anything related to it) has -- so far -- been pretty lame.  DC's Flashpoint at least made some sense.  I don't get the whole Marvel NOW initiative.  What exactly are they trying to do besides just restart series with #1 issues for the sake of sales?  Where are the big, life-changing events?  More importantly, where are the decent stories?



 

Time for Another Threesome

The word "trinity" is becoming as synonymous with DC Comics as the word "crisis."  It usually refers to DC's oldest and most commonly known icons: Batman, Superman, and Wonder Woman. 

In 2003, a three-issue mini-series titled Batman/Superman/Wonder Woman: Trinity was published, written and drawn by Matt Wagner.  It told of the first meeting of Batman, Superman, and Wonder Woman.

In 2008-2009, a weekly series titled Trinity replaced the 52 weekly series.  It, too, featured Batman, Superman, and Wonder Woman.  

Now, in 2013, DC Comics is offer the "Trinity War" storyline.  While it does feature the three superheroes again, the "trinity" in this story refers to the Trinity of Sin:  Pandora, Phantom Stranger, and the Question.  It could also refer to the three Justice Leagues -- Justice League, Justice League of America, and Justice League Dark -- as the story runs through all three titles, and the consequences of the war is supposed to affect all three teams.  I'm only halfway through the complete crossover story, but so far, it's one of the better stories I've read by DC since the New 52 began.  Unfortunately, typical New 52 story fare shows all the superheroes as "angry" and "stubborn," two qualities I prefer my superheroes not to have, unless it's Guy Gardner.  "Trinity War" also depicts the characters as angry (since the three teams are fighting one another), but at least it's a better told story. 

I like the character of Pandora, and I'm glad that DC gave her her own series.  (Kudos to DC for adding another female solo superhero comic!  She now joins the ranks of DC's growing number of female-led comics such as Batgirl, Batwoman, Birds of Prey, Katana, Supergirl, Wonder Woman, Worlds' Finest (starring Power Girl and Huntress), and the forthcoming Harley Quinn.)  Pandora reminds me of Pariah from Crisis on Infinite Earths.  She's doomed to witness the woes of the planet/universe for all eternity.  She also wears a dark, creepy hooded robe, like the pre-New 52 Raven. 

Since Pandora first appeared at the end of the Flashpoint mini-series which led to DC's New 52 (that wiped out every character's history and personality), I've always had hopes that the New 52 was temporary and Pandora would help dissolve this new world and bring DC back to its former glory.  I fear that's not going to happen with "Trinity War," but one can still hope. 

At any rate, I'm enjoying the storyline and the lame-up-til-now Justice League comics. Let's hope Pandora not only rocks my world, but hers as well. 

The New Gemworld is No Jewel

I hate to say "I told you so," but...aw, what the heck:  I told you so.  

DC Comics' Sword of Sorcery was cancelled after only 8 issues.  Is anyone surprised?  Not me.  

1) The title wasn't catchy.  It may have been catchy in 1973 when DC originally used that title.  Nope.  It wasn't even catchy then.  This recent series surpassed the original series by 3 issues.  

2) It carried a $3.99 price tag.  Batman comics can get away with it.  X-Men comics can get away with it.  No name comics with "minor" heroes cannot get away with it.  Even Superman comics are iffy. 

3) The back-up features sucked.  Big time.  They featured characters nobody had ever heard of.  In uninteresting stories.  Even with Marc Andreyko writing. 


4) Worst of all, Amethyst's return to the DC Universe and subsequent stories were lacking...in everything.  They weren't a joy to read.  In fact, they were quite boring.

The thing about Amethyst that made her somewhat popular in the 1980s was that she was fun.  She was a reprieve from the action-packed male-oriented comics.  She offered adventure and fantasy.  She also offered girls/women a comic book to read and call their own.  Amy Winston was a young teenage girl who was forced into the shoes of the adult Amethyst, Princess of Gemworld, much like Billy Batson and his Shazam/Captain Marvel alter ego.  We got to see how she dealt with being a teenager on Earth AND being a princess in Gemworld. 

During her original maxi-series and monthly series, Amethyst also wasn't linked to the other heroes in the DC Universe.  At least not at first.  That's when she was popular.  When DC tried to integrate her into the DCU as a Lord of Order, that's when she lost all popularity...and was basically banished from comicdom.  DC failed in this respect (again) when they tried to integrate Amethyst into Justice League Dark and had Constantine appear in her latest attempt at a series.

With the New 52 wiping clean the slate, DC had the perfect opportunity to revive the fun of Amethyst.  This was a chance to forget all about the Lords of Order and Chaos and get back to the magical land of Gemworld.  Unfortunately, the new Amethyst didn't bounce back and forth between Earth as a teenager and Gemworld as an adult.  Also, Gemworld wasn't very colorful.  It also didn't have the characters that we wanted to know about either.  How do we know what families/houses these characters belong to when they don't even wear clothing that match the color of their gem?  The stories aren't written well enough for us to care or remember.  You've gotta give us something! 

I appreciated that DC tried to make an effort to integrate Eclipso into Gemworld as a villain, as he seemed like a good fit gem-wise.  Unfortunately (again), the story pretty much sucked and was too dark.  Why does everything in the New 52 have to be so dark and dreary?  Why can't there be ANY fun anywhere in the new DCU?  

I'm writing this as an adult male who loved reading the original tales of Amethyst in the 1980s.  I was looking forward to reading her stories again, but was severely disappointed in DC's lack of attention to detail when reviving this young heroine.  Putting Amethyst into a Warlord type scenario was obviously not going to work.  Did no one read any of Amethyst's original stories to see what readers really liked "back in the day?"  And does every heroine in the new DCU have to carry a sword (e.g., Katana, Wonder Woman, Amethyst)?  Is that the token female weapon?  Enough's enough.  

Sadly, it's too late now to ever read another engaging tale of Amethyst.  My one hope was dashed.  Unless DC plans to have another Flashpoint that changes all DC history (again), the damage has already been done to this "new" Amethyst.  There's no hope of bringing back the fun to Gemworld and all of its whimsical characters.