kallis@pen.DEC (06/19/85)
While I normally domn't review comics publicly, I'll gladly make an exception in this case. SOST#40 was special in many ways. I won''t say it's "daring" to build the whole plot on the menstrual cycle, but it's certainly innovative; I was pleasantly surprised that somebody would do it, and do it that well. The basic story was interesting, but disappointing in that the situation started out in the hopeless rage of the Red Lodge and ended the same way; that the woman didn't realize that she had the power to throw off the restricting aspcts of the Red Lodge (and that she didn't "off" her inufferable husband, who deserved what he didn't get); that the wwerewolf aspect wasn't focused more. But the most disappointing aspect of the story was that the Samp Thing was effectively extraneous. In SOST#39, he played a central role in resolving a problem; in SOST#40, he was merely a spectator. With a little more work, Swampy could be driven further into the background until he becomes little more than a master of ceremonies for a tale ... This last thought is particularly unsettling because in the letter column of the issue, the editors characterize the magazine as "a horror comic"; funny, I've never thought of it that way, even though elements of the stories are indeed flavored that way (it's more background against which Swampy's growth and development are the foreground: would you call "Rites of Spring" a horror story?). If the editors get the idea of "horror comic" fully into their minds, they could change the comic's flavor and direction -- and not for the better. The one really good thing is that the written/visual script is ex- tremely tight. The kitchen knives shown in the first panel turn out to be far more than background, for instance. There's hardly a wasted word or panel. On that point alone, I think the comic's worth doing more than reading: it should be studied. It deserves it. Steve Kallis, Jr.
moriarty@fluke.UUCP (The Napoleon of Crime) (06/26/85)
In article <2771@decwrl.UUCP> kallis@pen.DEC writes: > But the most disappointing aspect of the story was that the Samp >Thing was effectively extraneous. In SOST#39, he played a central role >in resolving a problem; in SOST#40, he was merely a spectator. With a >little more work, Swampy could be driven further into the background >until he becomes little more than a master of ceremonies for a tale ... I don't think you need worry about ST becoming a "Cain & Abel" type character. Moore was, I think, pointing out that there was little the Swamp Thing *could* do to stop/help the woman (people bent on suicide are incredibly difficult to protect). > This last thought is particularly unsettling because in the letter >column of the issue, the editors characterize the magazine as "a horror >comic"; funny, I've never thought of it that way, even though elements >of the stories are indeed flavored that way (it's more background against >which Swampy's growth and development are the foreground: would you call >"Rites of Spring" a horror story?). If the editors get the idea of "horror >comic" fully into their minds, they could change the comic's flavor and >direction -- and not for the better. No, I think horror comic is deserved, because this comic works at generating horror (you wouldn't call the previous vampire story a romance, would you? :-) ). On the other hand, it's not a traditional horror comic -- nothing like the House of Mystery or EC books. Though I don't think Moore imitates anyone (he is, after all, the most phenomenal addition to comics scripting in the last 10 years), his work on ST does sometimes resemble the way Stephen King does horror, i.e. combining well-developed, non-stock characters with a horror story. But the horror is there... "If this is foreplay, I'm a dead man!" Moriarty, aka Jeff Meyer John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc. UUCP: {cornell,decvax,ihnp4,sdcsvax,tektronix,utcsri}!uw-beaver \ {allegra,gatech!sb1,hplabs!lbl-csam,decwrl!sun,ssc-vax} -- !fluke!moriarty ARPA: fluke!moriarty@uw-beaver.ARPA