Showing posts with label Jim Lee. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jim Lee. Show all posts

Incredibly, Boringly, Likeable

So, I bit the faster than a speeding bullet and bought Justice League #1.

I didn't think I was going to do it, as I'm not a particular fan of either Jim Lee or Geoff Johns. Both creators are obviously very good at what they do, but what they do is create mostly fun and vaguely unchallenging work. That said, "fun" and "vaguely unchallenging" are precisely the words I would use to describe Justice League #1 and that is precisely why I like it.

Before I get to why, let's take a step back.

Had I walked into my LCS this Wednesday, as tends to be my habit during the summer but rarely actually happens once the semester starts, I'm relatively confident that I would have ignored both the end of FLASHPOINT and the beginning of the New 52, unless I had happened to notice the dual physical/digital version of the JL release. That sort of thinking about digital is the sort of thinking I want to encourage by spending my dollars; there's no reason, particularly with the digital version at the $3.99 price point, that I shouldn't be able to get both, given that the digital version is almost certainly free to create because the digital files for most of the pages already exist.* As it happened, though, I didn't get to my LCS on Wednesday, and I was surfing the new version of Comixology and saw JL and I thought "Oh, well, I guess I haven't spent any money on comics this week," and then I bought it.

Now, to be clear, charging $3.99 for a digital comic is absurd, but I guess I paid for it, so good on DC for putting out product they know that readers will buy. I think if they want the digital market to be viable in the long term, however, they're going to have to consider lowering the price point on day-and-date books, or release every day-and-date book as some sort of physical/digital package (and this isn't as absurd as it sounds-- The New Yorker, which provides a significantly larger amount of content relative to the cost of a magazine, gives you access to both the physical magazine and the digital version for the same price when you subscribe), while relying on older, out-of-print books for digital only sales. I suppose that could take the legs out of the collectors market (then again: what collectors market?) or the trade paperback market, but I suspect that the respective audiences are actually sort of fundamentally different.

Anyway, I bought the damn thing at the absurd price, and then I read it and I liked it. In fact, despite a couple of issues that became apparent upon rereading, I still like it. But that's sort of how I feel about all of Johns' work, and all of Lee's work. It's incredibly, boringly, likeable. It isn't awesome, it isn't striking, what it is is sweet and enjoyable, but ultimately not very satisfying. Like candy. And Siege. But, remember, I liked Siege.

So, yea, there are problems: the dialogue is a little stilted, Jim Lee's art doesn't really pop like I would like, I'm not really that sympathetic to Vic Stone. But, at the same time, the bit with Batman and Hal Jordan's ring? Perfect. Almost makes having bought a $3.99 digital comic worth it. And the bit at the end, with Superman? That was pretty great too or, at least, great enough that I think I'll probably buy the next issue to see what happens, despite the fact that there's nothing really killer going on, despite the yawn-inducing promise of a Batman v. Superman duel, despite the fact that most of the issue is sort of ho-hum-superheroes-getting-to-know-each-other-by-fighting-before-everyone-realizes-they're-on-the-same-side (oh, did I jump a few issues ahead?)

To be completely honest, in this situation, with the brand new continuity, a boring, comfortable, incredibly likeable comic was exactly what Geoff Johns and Jim Lee needed (and could be counted on) to produce. "Look," they're saying "the details may be different, but the things you love about comics? They're the same. We promise. Let's show you."

And then they did.

------------

*Apparently, it was silly of me to assume that the physical/digital twofer was also $3.99. Would I pay a dollar extra for the digital version of the comic? Hell no. Apparently people did, though, since the book has gone on to a second printing.

Like I said up top, good for DC.

DC to Reboot Fictional Universe Simultaneous With Digital Download Scheme

The announcement from DC's official blog The Source on Tuesday conveniently mentioned only oblique things about the line-wide story reboot that will accompany the beginning of their same-day-digital-release plan. (A thank you to my buddy TJ (@StrsMyDestntion) for putting me on to this at all.) In fact, most of their promo material is skirting the issue.

DC has really put the fear of god (or God, whichever you prefer) into both its retailers and its fans with this double news. Same-day-digital release is risky. But restarting a series' numbering from 1 of a new volume always peeves some. Retooling ongoing stories with little warning downright angers people. Starting in August every single damn DC Comics character, property, and title will be available same-day-digital and gets a story re-boot with their new volumes. Or so it seems. The statements that have people concerned are those from DC The Source:
"the first issue of JUSTICE LEAGUE by Johns and Lee... will offer a contemporary take on the origin of the comic book industry’s premier superhero team."
and this one from DC co-publisher Dan DiDio in the big USA Today article:
"We really want to inject new life in our characters and line ... This was a chance to start, not at the beginning, but at a point where our characters are younger and the stories are being told for today's audience."
However, no other statements I've seen clearly make claim to a resetting of any narratives. Not even, as far as I can tell, this list of a few of the new titles with creator line-ups and quick 'new directions' descriptions from The Source. I'm an optimist: intentional misdirection to get fans angry and talking? Probably not. That's what I thought about Marvel's "Spider-Man: One More Day" (another attempt to 'refresh through reboot' the Spider-Man story) and I was dead wrong. The idea is to make the characters feel new again by disregarding the complicated stuff that's come before. Sounds great but smells very, very fishy to those of us who follow the industry's shake-ups of the past two decades. We've heard these things before, you see. It rarely goes well. I could show you proof:

Google "joe quesada spider-man one more day" or "crisis on infinite earths zero hour" or "grant morrison batman rip final crisis return" or "rob liefeld heroes reborn" or "john byrne spider-man chapter one". Some people liked these stories (and they have elements to recommend them), but they all have in common a deus ex machina, nonorganic, magic approach to storytelling. An approach that was inevitably again and again rolled-back.

That said? Totally HAS worked out on occasion. "Crisis on Infinite Earths" was more successful then not for a long time. Green Arrow being brought back from the dead. "Spider-Man: Revelations" narrowly solved more problems than it created. Regardless. As I wrote a few weeks ago, the stunt writing needs to stop. Just because you've done something shocking doesn't mean you've done something good.

Some of the smartest commentary I've seen on his issue has come from comics-artist and Hypothetical Island studio (@HypotheticIsle) member Reilly Brown. His Twitter stream (@Reilly_Brown) in real-time after the announcement read:

...

One statement that should have people excited is this one, also from DiDio in this ancillary USA Today interview:
"It's not just about straight superhero characters and stories. We're going to use war comics, we have stories set in mystery and horror, we've got Westerns."
Variety is a good thing.

The image below is being asociated with the news. It has been confirmed by The Source in a note from DC's Co-Publishers to be the cover of the new "Justice League" #1 (and to have been penciled by Jim Lee (@jimlee) and inked by his oft-art-partner Scott Williams, with colors by long-time DC colorist Alex Sinclair). As of Thursday June 2 at about 5 PM a Google Image search for: " "DC comics" reboot " brings it up first. And fourth and fifth and eighth and tenth and fifteenth and seventeenth and eighteenth...

And the sources for this image and other related ones? Most are comics-centric but mixed in are various sites that cover a variety of news, some with a dedicated section for comics, some without, including: MTV.com's Splash Page, GottaBeMobile.com, HomeIsPhones.com (whatever the hell those are), Movies.com (whose article is really about the implications for future film adaptation but gives a rounded overview of the issues), UGO.com, InsidePulse.com, KaboomMagazine.com, EscapistMagazine.com, and The Onion's famous AVClub.com. USA Today and The Associated Press are also covering this as it unfolds. This is indicative of the changed attitudes toward comics in the wider world, but much more-so the changed attitudes toward the superhero genre.

And that's a very good thing to this pundit's mind.

~@JonGorga

P.S. ~ I really try to resist this kind of commentary but... in the real world not EVERYONE wears a high collar. Or any single unifying element of clothing. These characters were always presented as different people from different places coming together to form a loose union. Looks silly to me for now. Just sayin'.