nmhr@nmtvax.UUCP (03/28/85)
*** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MASSAGE *** Since I am an avid fan of DAREDEVIL and ALPHA FLIGHT (having almost all 219 issues of DD and all 23 issues of AF), I will try to review them every month or so. As for credentials to review comics, all I can say is that I have my opinion...as ludicrous as it may seem to some. DAREDEVIL #219 The outstanding feature of this issue is that Frank Miller is back to script this issue. Given that fact, the reader might expect one of the best issues of DD ever. That is simply not the fact. While the concept of the issue (a new Matt Murdock personality in the 'Stranger') is interesting, the narration ruins the story. On the letters page, Ralph Macchio says that he "wanted something so offbeat the DD fans would be talking about it for years." To me, that purpose was served with the story by Harlan Ellison. In issue 219, "Bandlands" just doesn't compare with "The Most Dangerous Night of My Life." The thing about "Badlands" that most irritates me is the narration. In the first place, who is the narrator? WHoever it is, he seems to be very omniscient. My first thought was: hey, that monologue is so all- knowing that the narrator can only be one person: Shooter himself. (And everyone said he couldn't write!) The ending makes it quite obvious that the Stranger will be coming back again. I am not looking forward to it. ALPHA FLIGHT #23 Has it really been two years? It seems like yesterday when the Alphans were fighting Tundra and only this morning when James Hudson (Guardian) was killed. Alpha Flight is (to me) the best title that Marvel has. The great John Byrne has kept the characters from experiencing Shooter's editing and advising. This issue's story, "Night of the Beast," brings to rest some of the questions I have had about Snowbird and Sasquatch. The only detriment of the issue is the conspicuous absence of Shaman (who is guest appearing in DR. STRANGE, I hear). The rest of the story is flawless. Artwise, Byrne is still the best. The colors in my copy seem strange, like someone just picked a random blue or orange or whatever. Of course, that could be the quality of the paper. Otherwise, the art is fantastic, although not quite as good as FANTASTIC FOUR. Next month: ALPHA FLIGHT's two-year anniversary issue promises to be a spectacular one. Be there, or be misconstrued. Tracy McInvale New Mexico Humanities Review
hutch@shark.UUCP (Stephen Hutchison) (04/03/85)
[ Snikkt, Snikkt .... slash, gouge, cut, owwie ] In article <384@nmtvax.UUCP> nmhr@nmtvax.UUCP writes: >*** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MASSAGE *** > > > Since I am an avid fan of DAREDEVIL and ALPHA FLIGHT (having almost >all 219 issues of DD and all 23 issues of AF), I will try to review them >every month or so. As for credentials to review comics, all I can say is >that I have my opinion...as ludicrous as it may seem to some. > (Daredevil review excised) > >ALPHA FLIGHT #23 > Has it really been two years? It seems like yesterday when the Alphans >were fighting Tundra and only this morning when James Hudson (Guardian) >was killed. > Alpha Flight is (to me) the best title that Marvel has. The great >John Byrne has kept the characters from experiencing Shooter's editing >and advising. This issue's story, "Night of the Beast," brings to rest >some of the questions I have had about Snowbird and Sasquatch. The only >detriment of the issue is the conspicuous absence of Shaman (who is >guest appearing in DR. STRANGE, I hear). The rest of the story is flawless. > Artwise, Byrne is still the best. The colors in my copy seem strange, >like someone just picked a random blue or orange or whatever. Of course, >that could be the quality of the paper. Otherwise, the art is fantastic, >although not quite as good as FANTASTIC FOUR. > > >Next month: ALPHA FLIGHT's two-year anniversary issue promises to be > a spectacular one. Be there, or be misconstrued. > >Tracy McInvale >New Mexico Humanities Review Pardon me, Tracy, but I must tear your review to bloody shreds. First, the blind adoration of the "great" John Byrne, the most self-indulgent, pitiful, egotistical excuse for an artist since Jack Kirby. Fine, so those aren't necessarily faults in an artist. The characters haven't been touched by Shooter's "editing" because Byrne's writing, when it isn't done with a photocopier, is so close to Shooter's style as to reek of stylistic plagiarism. (Them's fightin words!) WELL, IT IS. Shooter has shallow characters, deus ex machina, and people do things for stupid reasons completely out of character with their established personas, and Byrne is much the same. The major reason why it looks like there is any kind of difference is that Byrne still uses the Claremont "I...Hurt" style of dialog, and makes the feeble attempt to make powerful women characters, or at least interesting ones. The ONLY place where he has succeeded in this is the character of Heather. And I fully expect her to gain some kind of power within the next twenty issues, or die horribly. As for the questions about Sasquatch and Snowbird, well, he seems to have, ahem, REVISED the origin of the former. At least in "next month's issue" he gets rid of them both. No, this is NOT a spoiler, this has been pre-announced for some time and is obvious to anyone who actually bothers to learn the Byrne style of formula plotting. As for the ARTWORK... GLAAAAH! I haven't seen anything so shoddy since the disgusting Giant Sized Avengers #4! Ill-proportioned characters (not just non-heroic, but DEFORMED, and not only Puck!) in painfully impossible poses are the RULE in Byrne's new style of FAST! work. Not only that, but he has this amazing ability to draw exactly three male heads, and exactly two female heads, and exactly one basic female body, and exactly four basic male bodies. Then he draws in a costume, or a bit of dangling fur, or some long, short, or punk (on the WRONG PEOPLE) hair, or a bit of slithery mucous, and he claims that they look different! Byrne's artwork is a slap in the face of anyone who actually pays money for his books. (Yes, I buy AF, mostly from habit, and partly because the stories and characters he lifts here are less familiar to me than the ones he spoils in FF.) I won't even begin (it would take too long) to describe what he has done wrong with the once-Fantastic Four. Besides plagiarizing stories. It will be interesting to see what happens when Byrne takes over the Hulk. I have often wondered what a skinny, emaciated Hulk with an egg for a head and eyes that sink all the way back into the wrong side of his head, would look like, and you may expect (based on his past performance) to see that creature soon after he takes over. I can barely wait for his sixth issue, where he does 3/4 of the book as panels of green with the occasional sound effect. At least he won't have to write dialog! Hutch ( rant, rave, snarl... snikt, drip, drip, drip )
ph@wudma.UUCP (04/11/85)
>> Alpha Flight is (to me) the best title that Marvel has. The great >>John Byrne has kept the characters from experiencing Shooter's editing >>and advising. This issue's story, "Night of the Beast," brings to rest >>some of the questions I have had about Snowbird and Sasquatch. The only >>detriment of the issue is the conspicuous absence of Shaman (who is >>guest appearing in DR. STRANGE, I hear). The rest of the story is flawless. >> Artwise, Byrne is still the best. The colors in my copy seem strange, >>like someone just picked a random blue or orange or whatever. Of course, >>that could be the quality of the paper. Otherwise, the art is fantastic, >>although not quite as good as FANTASTIC FOUR. > >Pardon me, Tracy, but I must tear your review to bloody shreds. >First, the blind adoration of the "great" John Byrne, the most self-indulgent, >pitiful, egotistical excuse for an artist since Jack Kirby. Fine, so those >aren't necessarily faults in an artist. The characters haven't been touched >by Shooter's "editing" because Byrne's writing, when it isn't done with a >photocopier, is so close to Shooter's style as to reek of stylistic plagiarism. >(Them's fightin words!) WELL, IT IS. Shooter has shallow characters, deus >ex machina, and people do things for stupid reasons completely out of character >with their established personas, and Byrne is much the same. The major reason >why it looks like there is any kind of difference is that Byrne still uses the >Claremont "I...Hurt" style of dialog, and makes the feeble attempt to make >powerful women characters, or at least interesting ones. The ONLY place where >he has succeeded in this is the character of Heather. And I fully expect her >to gain some kind of power within the next twenty issues, or die horribly. I can't speak for Tracey, but I am going to put in my two cents worth in defense of one of my favorite writer/artists. I will freely admit to being something of a John Byrne fan; in fact his work is mostly what brought me to comic collecting two short years ago. Nevertheless I don't think my respect for his talent is in any way "blind"--very often he does things that annoy me (more on them later). Overall, though, I like him, and find it amazing that anyone could think his writing style anything like Shooter's. This being mostly a difference at the gut level of taste, I won't pursue the matter any further, save that Shooter's writing makes me positively wince, and if they're all that much alike I'm amazed I haven't noticed. >As for the questions about Sasquatch and Snowbird, well, he seems to have, ahem, >REVISED the origin of the former. At least in "next month's issue" he gets rid >of them both. No, this is NOT a spoiler, this has been pre-announced for some >time and is obvious to anyone who actually bothers to learn the Byrne style of >formula plotting. On the contrary, the origin of Sasquatch posed exactly the question which was resolved in issue 23. One of the reasons I found this issue so satisfying was that Byrne still managed to surprise me even though I more or less knew what was going on with Squatch. As for Byrne's "formula plotting"--I don't know about you, but I don't think Walt Langkowski was quite gotten rid of by the end of #24. >As for the ARTWORK... GLAAAAH! I haven't seen anything so shoddy since the >disgusting Giant Sized Avengers #4! Ill-proportioned characters (not just >non-heroic, but DEFORMED, and not only Puck!) in painfully impossible poses >are the RULE in Byrne's new style of FAST! work. Not only that, but he has >this amazing ability to draw exactly three male heads, and exactly two female >heads, and exactly one basic female body, and exactly four basic male bodies. >Then he draws in a costume, or a bit of dangling fur, or some long, short, or >punk (on the WRONG PEOPLE) hair, or a bit of slithery mucous, and he claims >that they look different! Byrne's artwork is a slap in the face of anyone who >actually pays money for his books. (Yes, I buy AF, mostly from habit, and >partly because the stories and characters he lifts here are less familiar to >me than the ones he spoils in FF.) It is true that with two magazines a month to pencil Byrne has to work awfully fast, and sometimes it shows--example: the training-room session near the beginning of #23, with Talisman and Puck. (Another thing I find annoying about this scene is that the old never-get-faked-out turnaround is so corny. Didn't I promise you something else I didn't like?) It is true also that his people do start to look rather similar sometimes. On the other hand--take a squint at some of his recent stuff in FF, particularly the party scene in "Suffer a Witch to Live . . .", if you think he can't make people look different. In short: there are weak spots, but overall I would still say the quality of the artwork is excellent. (By the way, regarding the colors in AF #23: I had been suspecting it for a while, and the lettercol in #24 confirmed that Marvel is experimenting with a new printing process. It brings in the colors much more brightly, which could be nice, I guess, but as it's been done so far I find it too garish.) >I won't even begin (it would take too long) to describe what he has done wrong >with the once-Fantastic Four. Besides plagiarizing stories. I begin to suspect that this is a discussion which could come near to violence in person . . . anyway, I find Byrne's FF fresh and interesting. Maybe I haven't read the stuff he plagiarized from yet. In addition, I am somewhat of the opinion that what story you tell isn't as important as how well you tell it (How many basic storylines are there anyway? Person has conflict. Person resolves conflict. The End. :-), and I happen to enjoy the way Byrne tells his stories a lot. --pH /* * "DIE, BEAST!!" */