[net.comics] "Tonight on 20/20: Stupid Pet Trick

cdrigney@uokvax.UUCP (03/02/86)

> /* Written  1:38 am  Feb 24, 1986 by moriarty@fluke.UUCP in uokvax.UUCP:net.comics */
> X-MEN #205 [C-]:

> Yes, the art is very nice, but I feel like I'm missing out on
> something here. Who is Lady Deathstrike?  I don't remember from
> any of the previous X-Men

Lady Deathstrike was introduced recently in Alpha Flight, during
Wolverine's guest appearance there.  Yes, fellow loyal fans, we
wait TEN YEARS for Wolverine's origin, and Bill Mantlo does it.
At least he didn't butcher it the way he did Puck's.  I feel the
start of an anti-Mantlo rant starting, so I won't say any more.

> JON SABLE #36 [C+]:

> I'm not sure I like Grell's new heavier-inked style; however,

I had heard they were just using Grell's pencils, without ink.
Anyone know for sure?

> ADVENTURES OF THE OUTSIDERS #33 [C-]:

> Alan Davis's artwork keeps this from boredom, but, really,
> Adolph Hitler AGAIN?!  The poor sod has been re-animated so
> many time's, he must leave

Agree on both counts.  And doesn't Windfall look an awful lot
like Terra?  Hmmm, New Wave as a water elemental, Windfall as
air, the redhead (some stupid name) as fire, and Terra/Geoforce
as earth.  Is this just coincidence, or do we have something yet
to learn about some backgrounds here?

> THE SHADOW #1 [B+]:

I agree with you here, Chaykin brings the Shadow into the 80's
very nicely.  I'm looking forward to the rest of this, even
though I'm an Avenger fan (and occassionally Doc), not Shadow.

> DAREDEVIL #231 [B+]:

I agree with you, this is great stuff.

> DAKOTA NORTH #1 [C-]:

> Yeah, the story doesn't strike me as too hot either, and some
> of it is just ridiculous, but much of the dialogue is sterling,
> and the North family reminds me (somewhat) of the bizarre
> families you used to find in forties screwball comedies. I'll
> give it an issue or two more.

Someone remarked that this was like a TV Detective show, and I
agree with them.  Still, if the art were good I'd enjoy it, but
it isn't and I can't.  I'll probably give it another issue or two
just to make sure.

> FIRESTAR #4 [C-]:

> I'm almost ready to laud this because it didn't end terribly,
> as so many Marvel mini-series do.  Nothing splendid, but not bad.

I was definitely disappointed in this, partly because I wanted a
closer look at the Hellions.  This is yet another example of a
one-issue comic stretched into a mini-series.  The only thing
less impressive than the plot and the main character was the
artwork.  And there's simply no way the White Queen would leave
(SPOILER) Firestar's bodyguard alive to warn her - she's not that
sloppy.  This storyline was done much, much better in Steven
King's _Firestarter_, and should have either been left there, or
done well.

> SCOUT #4  [Fashion in Action: C]:

> I haven't read the Scout lead stories for the last three
> issues, so I can't comment on Truman's work, but FASHION IN
> ACTION should be given its own book soon, so that SCOUT can die
> an undisturbed death.

You should check out the Scout stories.  I like Fashion in
Action, but think I'd like it better if the art weren't so ...
strange.  Still, it does grow on one.
I think Scout should die after it finishes its current storyline,
otherwise it'll just drag on.

> THE OUTSIDERS #8 [B-]:

> Goodnight, X-Men.  I have found another to take your place.

I dropped Batman and the Outsiders long ago, but picked up #8
because of the Tengu in it, and discovered it had become good
again.  So now I'm busy filling in back issues.  However, the
villains' names are even worse than Roy Thomas': Madame Ovary,
the Bad Samaritan, Duke of Oil?  Give me a break!

I agree that this is much better than the X-Men, which is
wallowing in Claremont's self-indulgence and Shooter's insipid
ideas of Secret Wars.

		--Carl Rigney
USENET:		{ihnp4,allegra!cbosgd}!okstate!uokvax!cdrigney

slrichte@uok.UUCP (03/08/86)

>>Moriarty
>>JON SABLE #36 [C+]: 

>>I'm not sure I like Grell's new heavier-inked style; however, it contrasts
>>Sable's final portrait very nicely.  And besides, I read this book for the
>>characters and the way the book moves graphically (close-ups of faces in a
>>variety of lighting).  It's a pleasant change from other books, at the very
>>least. 

>Carl
>I had heard they were just using Grell's pencils, without ink.
>Anyone know for sure?

 Grell is indeed using materials that enable First to reproduce his 
 art directly from pencils.  That wouldn't be bad if Grell would put
 some time into the book, but the increase in price and the decline in
 the art are making me consider dropping SABLE from my 'buy' list.   
 Another thing that bugs me about SABLE is the woman who answers the 
 questions in the lettercol.  Who is she?  She never has anything worth- 
 while to say.  


				     -- Steve Richter

USENET:		{ihnp4,allegra!cbosgd}!okstate!uokvax!uok!slrichte

USMAIL:         S. Richter c/o Southside, 754 Asp, Norman, OK 73069

"[The cancellation of MARS] was the real growing up of First Comics..."

                                     -- Rick Obadiah