This graphic novel has been getting a good deal of mainstream attention lately, thanks to its little-known historical subject matter, the Hollywood attention it has already garnered and, of course, that it's written by Max Brooks, one of the most successful prose-about-zombies writers (whose World War Z was also made into a movie).
I don't really care for the cover though. Not the image; that's fine. It's the way it breaks up the creative team for maximum confusion. If it really is a graphic novel—and I assume it is, although I haven't seen it yet—it's not really "illustrated" by anyone. The artist, Caanan White, is just as much the creator and author as the guy who wrote the script, whether or not the book was a passion project conceived and pursued by the writer and the artist came in once the script—maybe even an extrenely full, Alan Moore-style script—was completed as a sort of work-for-hire type of thing.
Comics, and graphic novels, are, by definition, words and pictures, and the pictures are every bit as important, if not more so, than the words (If they did it right, somewhere between 90 and 99-percent of every page of this book should consist of space filled by White's drawings, not Brooks' words).
I don't understand why White is credited as an illustrator here then, as illustrating is a very, very different thing than drawing a comic, as anyone in the business of publishing books knows.
Actually, I don't really understand why the cover credits either man as it does, as at first glance it looks like White is the sole creator, since there's a "by" by his name, and then you look around for another nanosecond and see Brooks' name there, but sans a "by" or any sort of credit. It looks like a wily designer left it there simply to trip the charging figure on the cover.
Ideally, the cover would just say "Harlem Hellfighters by Max Brooks and Caanan White," and not "Harlem Hellfighrers Illustrated by Caanan White...MAX BROOKS."
I mean, I get that Brooks is the big reason this book has been published, and is one of the main selling points the publisher is using as a hook or angle to market the book, but regardless of who gets top-billing or bigger font-size, this particular formulation of who did what is extremely peculiar, as White technically gets top billing (on the cover itself, anyway; not sure what the spine and title page look like) and is assigned a particular function, even if its an inaccurate description of what he contributed, while Brooks' name just hangs at there at the bottom, with no function assigned to him.
Even James Patterson novels, of which a new one is released on a fortnightly basis, and celebrity-"authored" books mostly written by someone other than the celebrity are a little more accurate in their crediting of who did what, using a "with" and a smaller font for the name of the writer who is not James Patterson or the celebrity. Those at least make clear that both parties contributed to the authorship, regardless of who is emphasized as the major draw.
Showing posts with label trade dress. Show all posts
Showing posts with label trade dress. Show all posts
Wednesday, April 02, 2014
Friday, April 05, 2013
Oh, comics.
In 2012, Grant Morrison's 2011 comic book series Batman, Incorporated was collected into a hardcover graphic novel edition that contained all eight issues of the series, plus the over-sized Batman, Inc: Leviathan Strikes! special that sort of smooshed a few issues' worth of content into a single comic book in order to wrap up the storyline at a logical end point before DC Comics rebooted their fictional universe and refurbished their DCU line of books. The collection was entitled Batman, Incorporated Vol. 1.
Later in 2012, DC relaunched the Morrison-written Batman, Incorporated comic with a new #1, and the series picked up right where the canceled series had ended, continuing Morrison's long-running, multi-title storyline de- and re-constructing Batman. This current iteration of Batman, Inc will conclude with July's issue #13.
In this week's comics, DC ran house ads for several upcoming collections, including one for the newer, New 52 second volume of Batman, Inc.
It will be entitled Batman, Incorporated Vol. 1: The Demon Star.
So if you want to read Morrison's Batman, Inc in trade, you have to start with Batman, Inc Vol. 1 and then proceed to the second volume, which is also entitled Batman, Inc. Vol. 1, and then I suppose there will be a third volume, which will, of course, be Batman, Inc Vol. 2.
Honestly I can't imagine why comic books aren't more widely read.
Later in 2012, DC relaunched the Morrison-written Batman, Incorporated comic with a new #1, and the series picked up right where the canceled series had ended, continuing Morrison's long-running, multi-title storyline de- and re-constructing Batman. This current iteration of Batman, Inc will conclude with July's issue #13.
In this week's comics, DC ran house ads for several upcoming collections, including one for the newer, New 52 second volume of Batman, Inc.
It will be entitled Batman, Incorporated Vol. 1: The Demon Star.
So if you want to read Morrison's Batman, Inc in trade, you have to start with Batman, Inc Vol. 1 and then proceed to the second volume, which is also entitled Batman, Inc. Vol. 1, and then I suppose there will be a third volume, which will, of course, be Batman, Inc Vol. 2.
Honestly I can't imagine why comic books aren't more widely read.
Saturday, December 08, 2012
Maybe someday I'll be the first result for Google searches for "You shitbug."
When Shuzo Oshimi introduces high-schooler Nakamura, the weirdest, wickedest point of the character triangle in Flowers of Evil, he does so by having her tell her teacher, "Shut up, you shitbug."
"Shitbug" is an insult she employs over and over, and is such a particular, peculiar insult—I've never heard it before reading this, and the closest I can think of is the American "shitbird," which I also find kind of hilarious in it's weird-ness—and one of the things I found amusing about the character.
In the last volume I read, Vol. 3, one of Oshimi's between-chapters notes about the work on the series was about a proposed cover for the first volume, above. As you can see from the sketch above, rather than having the title of the book in a dialogue bubble, Oshimi had Nakamura calling the reader a shitbug (Publisher Vertical vetoed this idea).
Too bad; they could have had her screaming this at the reader on the cover of a future volume:
"Shitbug" is an insult she employs over and over, and is such a particular, peculiar insult—I've never heard it before reading this, and the closest I can think of is the American "shitbird," which I also find kind of hilarious in it's weird-ness—and one of the things I found amusing about the character.
In the last volume I read, Vol. 3, one of Oshimi's between-chapters notes about the work on the series was about a proposed cover for the first volume, above. As you can see from the sketch above, rather than having the title of the book in a dialogue bubble, Oshimi had Nakamura calling the reader a shitbug (Publisher Vertical vetoed this idea).
Too bad; they could have had her screaming this at the reader on the cover of a future volume:
Friday, September 17, 2010
James Robinson makes his debut as an artist!
How is Robinson's artwork? Surprisingly good! He has a versatile, almost chameleonic style, that shifts from story to story. Sometimes his work looks remarkably like Pete Woods' or Renato Guedes'; other times it looks exactly like that of Jesus Merino or Gary Frank.
Okay I'm just being an ass, as is my wont. Robinson and Johns wrote the majority of the contents of this collection (Sterling Gates wrote a little too), and either because Robinson and Johns were the big "stars" associated with the book or/and because there were so many different artists (seven different pencilers), they only credited the writers on the cover.
The trade paperback version adds Gary Frank's name to the cover as well:
I grabbed this copy from a library shelf, thinking I'd catch up on the Superman: The World of New Krypton limited series, the 12-issue about Superman living on New Krypton while his Mon-El starred in Superman and the latest versions of Flamebird and Nightwing starred in Action Comics for about a year. The first book collected here is Superman's Pal, Jimmy Olsen Special #1 by Robinson, Merino and four other artists, which I had actually already read, but I figured I'd reread it on my way through the rest of the story. I got to the third panel on page four when I completely lost interest:
That's part of a conversation in which Jimmy Olsen's nameless girlfriend dumps him, informing him that she's moving to Midway City. His response is simply, "Oh."Like I said, I read this story before, having bought the single issue version, so I guess I read this scene, but for whatever reason, the soul-crushing sadness of it didn't strike me so hard the first time around (Perhaps I was just less depressed in general about the state of Superman comics, DC comics, James Robinson's writing, super-comics in general, whatever back then).
I have a hard time thinking of a thought more dismal than that of Superman's Pal, Jimmy Olsen joylessly fucking some nameless girl he doesn't even like while she similarly uses him until she can't stand it any longer.
I put the book down for a couple days, and then tried again, making it through the rest of that particular comic's worth of story before hitting the second comic's worth of story and realizing I had read that too (Adventure Comics Special Featuring the Guardian #1). As it turns out, I've actually read everything collected here—in addition to the two comics previously mentioned, it also includes Superman: New Krypton Special #1, Superman #681 and Action Comics #871—and had no desire to reread it.
There's no single panel that suggests the dreariness of the one I posted above, but the book is a series of down notes with brief flashes of paranoia, obscure characters reappearing in unexpected ways and some fantasy xenophobia that more often than not comes across as silly.
I guess maybe World of New Krypton material I was interested in checking out is included in Superman: New Krypton Vols. 2-3...?
Well, that will teach me to take a collected edition home from the library without first thoroughly flipping through it. Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go reread a few random pages from Showcase Presents: The Superman Family to stave off my melancholy...
Monday, October 12, 2009
You go with the Bone One Volume Edition you find on sale, not the one you might want or wish to have at a later time
I try to avoid going into Half Price Books, the chain of used book stores that re-sell books at half their original cover price, since the last thing I need to do is bring more printed matter into my small, one-bedroom apartment, which will one day likely expode from having too many comic books compressed into too small a space. If I must go into a Half Price Books, I try my hardest not to look at the comics or graphic novels, as I'll inevitably rationalize myself into buying them ("I probably shouldn't get this Essential Tomb of Dracula Vol. 4 yet, since I don't have volumes two or three, but on the other hand, it's only nine bucks—when will I find such a great deal on it again?").
Unfortunately I recently found myself brought to a Half Price Books during one of their occasional additional 20-percent off sales, which meant everything there was then seventy percent off, and, well, I couldn't resist the pull of the graphic novel shelf.
I got three great Tarzan collections from Dark Horse (including two by Russ Manning!), three Elephant & Piggie books by the great Mo Willems (whose art on this particular series of books I not only love, but also admire and envy), and, best of all, I found a Bone: One Volume Editon, one of those two-and-a-quarter-inch-thick monster bricks-of-a-book, which puts Jeff Smith's entire epic between two covers.
I originally read Bone in the single-volume series of Cartoon Book trades borrowed from the Columbus Metropolitan Library, so I never owned it any form. There were several times I picked up a copy of the one volume edition, looked longingly at it, considered it, and put it back, figuring I'd use that $40 on comics I haven't already read yet. I kept putting purchasing it off, and then it eventually went out of print, apparently because Smith didn't want to compete with the Scholastic Books color versions of the trades when they were first being released.
But here was a copy of it for half off ($19.98 instead of $39.95!), with an additional 20-percent off on top of that! So, like $17 something, I guess...? I'd be a fool not to buy it, right?
Once I got it home, I realized that I don't care for the cover of the book, at least not compared to some of the other one-volume edition covers (This post on Smith's Boneville blog, which I linked to above, talks a bit about the various covers for the one-volume edition).
It's not all that representative of what goes on within the book and, if I didn't know a thing about Bone, I might think it was some sort of horror-genre story based on this single image.
The newer one-volume edition features this image of Fone Bone sitting upon a rock in one of the goregous landscapes that Smith has often cited as extremely influential in the creation of the comic.
It's also much prettier looking.
But as Donald Rumsfeld once famously said, "As you know, you go with the Bone: One Volume Edition you have on sale for 70-percent off. It's not the Bone: One Volume Edition you might want or wish to have at a later time."
Unfortunately I recently found myself brought to a Half Price Books during one of their occasional additional 20-percent off sales, which meant everything there was then seventy percent off, and, well, I couldn't resist the pull of the graphic novel shelf.
I got three great Tarzan collections from Dark Horse (including two by Russ Manning!), three Elephant & Piggie books by the great Mo Willems (whose art on this particular series of books I not only love, but also admire and envy), and, best of all, I found a Bone: One Volume Editon, one of those two-and-a-quarter-inch-thick monster bricks-of-a-book, which puts Jeff Smith's entire epic between two covers.
I originally read Bone in the single-volume series of Cartoon Book trades borrowed from the Columbus Metropolitan Library, so I never owned it any form. There were several times I picked up a copy of the one volume edition, looked longingly at it, considered it, and put it back, figuring I'd use that $40 on comics I haven't already read yet. I kept putting purchasing it off, and then it eventually went out of print, apparently because Smith didn't want to compete with the Scholastic Books color versions of the trades when they were first being released.
But here was a copy of it for half off ($19.98 instead of $39.95!), with an additional 20-percent off on top of that! So, like $17 something, I guess...? I'd be a fool not to buy it, right?
Once I got it home, I realized that I don't care for the cover of the book, at least not compared to some of the other one-volume edition covers (This post on Smith's Boneville blog, which I linked to above, talks a bit about the various covers for the one-volume edition).
It's not all that representative of what goes on within the book and, if I didn't know a thing about Bone, I might think it was some sort of horror-genre story based on this single image. The newer one-volume edition features this image of Fone Bone sitting upon a rock in one of the goregous landscapes that Smith has often cited as extremely influential in the creation of the comic.
It's also much prettier looking.But as Donald Rumsfeld once famously said, "As you know, you go with the Bone: One Volume Edition you have on sale for 70-percent off. It's not the Bone: One Volume Edition you might want or wish to have at a later time."
Wednesday, July 08, 2009
Sometimes my commenters think of much better jokes than I do.
Last night I posted the above image and noted that the cover credits seemed to indicate that Paul Dini was the only creator involved, instead of being one of the two writers whose work is within (not to mention the four pencil artists and three inkers). Reader Heather's comment was actually better than the post of mine that she was responding to: "By looking at the cover we can clearly see Paul Dini collaborated with Batman on this run of Detective."
Damn, I wish I thought of that...
Tuesday, July 07, 2009
Paul Dini, one man band
I noticed copy of 2007's Batman: Detective at the library today, and was bemused by the presentation of the title and credits on the cover:
Who is the author of this book? Why it's none other than famed writer/artist Paul Dini, apparently.
Actually, if you've read any of these comics before, then you know Dini's just a writer, so he had to have at least one other guy helping him create the contents of this trade paperback, even if you ignore the inkers, colorists and letterers, as cover credits so often do.
This slim, 144-page trade includes six issues of Detective Comics, only five of which are written by Dini. It also includes a fill-in issue written by Royal McGraw, which kind of misses the point of fill-in issues—it's a story published specifically to meet a particular deadline to make sure that a monthly comic is actually on sale during a particular month, there's no reason to re-publish it in a trade collection. Particularly if it's a throwaway story about a minor villain from a Batman comic published over 20 years ago (which another writer already wrote fifteen years ago anyway), a villain who was killed off in the pages of another comic and especially if the organizing principle of your trade collection is the work of a particular writer, who is being given co-billing with freaking Batman on the cover.
Four different pencil artists have a hand in these stories by Dini and McGraw: J.H. Williams III, Don Kramer, Joe Benitez and Marcos Marz. And there are three different inkers. I note that not because it effects the quality of the book—each of these are one-off, done-in-one stories, so the book reads like an anthology anyway—but because that's an awful lot of people contributing to the creation of this book that aren't Paul Dini.
And yet the cover just says Dini. Not Dini and others or Dini and friends or Dini and McGraw, Williams, Kramer, Benitez and Marz in teensy-tiny font. Ditto the spine, which just has the words "Batman: Detective", "Paul Dini" and "DC Comics" on it.
Oh wait, here we go, in the lower right corner of the back cover, above the UPC symbol:
Who is the author of this book? Why it's none other than famed writer/artist Paul Dini, apparently. Actually, if you've read any of these comics before, then you know Dini's just a writer, so he had to have at least one other guy helping him create the contents of this trade paperback, even if you ignore the inkers, colorists and letterers, as cover credits so often do.
This slim, 144-page trade includes six issues of Detective Comics, only five of which are written by Dini. It also includes a fill-in issue written by Royal McGraw, which kind of misses the point of fill-in issues—it's a story published specifically to meet a particular deadline to make sure that a monthly comic is actually on sale during a particular month, there's no reason to re-publish it in a trade collection. Particularly if it's a throwaway story about a minor villain from a Batman comic published over 20 years ago (which another writer already wrote fifteen years ago anyway), a villain who was killed off in the pages of another comic and especially if the organizing principle of your trade collection is the work of a particular writer, who is being given co-billing with freaking Batman on the cover.
Four different pencil artists have a hand in these stories by Dini and McGraw: J.H. Williams III, Don Kramer, Joe Benitez and Marcos Marz. And there are three different inkers. I note that not because it effects the quality of the book—each of these are one-off, done-in-one stories, so the book reads like an anthology anyway—but because that's an awful lot of people contributing to the creation of this book that aren't Paul Dini.
And yet the cover just says Dini. Not Dini and others or Dini and friends or Dini and McGraw, Williams, Kramer, Benitez and Marz in teensy-tiny font. Ditto the spine, which just has the words "Batman: Detective", "Paul Dini" and "DC Comics" on it.
Oh wait, here we go, in the lower right corner of the back cover, above the UPC symbol:
Thursday, June 04, 2009
I know this is just a prose book, but it's still a pretty cool looking one
I'm not sure why exactly I'm interested in Bigfoot, a so-called cryptid animal that I don't believe in (surely the advent of the cellphone camera signals the end of all belief in him, doesn't it?) and yet I love reading about him. In his new book Bigfoot: The Life and Times of a Legend (University of Chicago Press; 2009), author Joshua Blu Buhs talks about why the creature has proven so attractive to so many people over the years, and I don't really meet any of those criteria.
I do know why I picked this particular book up, though: It's fantastic looking. A Matt Avery is responsible for the overall design of the book and the jacket, and the illustrations are credited to a Lauren Nassef, whose work is quite nice in general (Check it out).
Here's the front cover of it:

I love that image. It's a great standalone image, and one that not only catches the eye, but actually captures the contents of the book remarkably well.
Buhs isn't a believer either, and explains he was originally drawn to the subject because in his previous work on fire ants he found that he greatly enjoyed writing about an animal subject's interaction with human culture, but was rather frustrated with all of the deep science involved with learning about the animal's actual behavior. An animal that didn't actually exist then seemed to suit his needs perfectly.
The hoaxing involved in the legend of Bigfoot, from people making fake tracks to at least one fake suit, is suggested by Nassef's cover, as is the the concept of people projecting themselves inside Bigfoot, something Buhs talks about quite a bit.
Here's the back cover:

The fur extends to the spine of the book as well, and thus this thing looks cool from whatever angle—face front on a coffee table or nightstand, shelved spine out or even absently left laying on its cover.
You can't really tell from the scan, but the front cover also has a faux wooden look, seeming as if the front cover was actually made out of wood. The inside covers and the first and last pages are also wooden looking, although darker, and with a palpable, groove-filled texture. I'm not generally one to fetishize book design, but damn, this is one nice looking book.
In addition to that nice cover image and the field of fur pattern, Nassef also provides an illustration that appears at the very end of the book, after the notes and bibliography, a parting sighting of the subject matter:

My scan's rather poor, owing to not wanting to badly mangle a library book, which accounts for the shadow there, but you get a pretty good idea of what a nice drawing of Bigfoot Nassef has made. (Especially if you click it. Clicking the images makes 'em bigger; you knew that, right?)
The book itself, by the way, is really great, maybe the best Bigfoot book I've read, replacing Where Bigfoot Walks: Crossing the Dark Divide by Robert Michael Pyle, which addressed the same subject—the cultural history of Bigfoot divorced from the is he or isn't he real debate—from the perspective of a nature writer and environmentalist who was hiking through Bigfoot country. If someone asked me to suggest a book about Bigfoot to them two weeks ago, I would have suggest Pyle's; if you asked me today, I'd suggest Buhs'. Not only is it a good book, but it's a beautiful object as well.
I do know why I picked this particular book up, though: It's fantastic looking. A Matt Avery is responsible for the overall design of the book and the jacket, and the illustrations are credited to a Lauren Nassef, whose work is quite nice in general (Check it out).
Here's the front cover of it:

I love that image. It's a great standalone image, and one that not only catches the eye, but actually captures the contents of the book remarkably well.
Buhs isn't a believer either, and explains he was originally drawn to the subject because in his previous work on fire ants he found that he greatly enjoyed writing about an animal subject's interaction with human culture, but was rather frustrated with all of the deep science involved with learning about the animal's actual behavior. An animal that didn't actually exist then seemed to suit his needs perfectly.
The hoaxing involved in the legend of Bigfoot, from people making fake tracks to at least one fake suit, is suggested by Nassef's cover, as is the the concept of people projecting themselves inside Bigfoot, something Buhs talks about quite a bit.
Here's the back cover:

The fur extends to the spine of the book as well, and thus this thing looks cool from whatever angle—face front on a coffee table or nightstand, shelved spine out or even absently left laying on its cover.
You can't really tell from the scan, but the front cover also has a faux wooden look, seeming as if the front cover was actually made out of wood. The inside covers and the first and last pages are also wooden looking, although darker, and with a palpable, groove-filled texture. I'm not generally one to fetishize book design, but damn, this is one nice looking book.
In addition to that nice cover image and the field of fur pattern, Nassef also provides an illustration that appears at the very end of the book, after the notes and bibliography, a parting sighting of the subject matter:

My scan's rather poor, owing to not wanting to badly mangle a library book, which accounts for the shadow there, but you get a pretty good idea of what a nice drawing of Bigfoot Nassef has made. (Especially if you click it. Clicking the images makes 'em bigger; you knew that, right?)
The book itself, by the way, is really great, maybe the best Bigfoot book I've read, replacing Where Bigfoot Walks: Crossing the Dark Divide by Robert Michael Pyle, which addressed the same subject—the cultural history of Bigfoot divorced from the is he or isn't he real debate—from the perspective of a nature writer and environmentalist who was hiking through Bigfoot country. If someone asked me to suggest a book about Bigfoot to them two weeks ago, I would have suggest Pyle's; if you asked me today, I'd suggest Buhs'. Not only is it a good book, but it's a beautiful object as well.
Monday, December 10, 2007
Delayed Reaction: Dark Tower: The Gunslinger Born

Dark Tower: The Gunslinger Born (Marvel Comics), by Peter David, Robin Furth, Jae Lee and Richard Isanove
Why’d I wait?: It was with some trepidation that I read the first issue of the seven-part series. Marvel’s relentless hyping of the book was a huge turn-off, but it was the sort of case where the publisher saying it was an event so often and so loud genuinely made it an event, and as a critic I felt I needed to check it out for myself.
Despite having no previous experience with the series of novels it’s based on, or any great affection for the work of the artist or the writer (at least, not when he’s in paycheck mode), and despite being sick of hearing about Marvel’s adaptation of Stephen King’s Dark Tower series long before I even cracked the cover, the first issue was pretty enjoyable.
It just wasn’t anything I felt I need to drop a couple bucks on every month, and so I stopped at #1.
Why now?: I recently saw it on a Best of 2007 list from a fairly reputable source, and was surprised to see it there, given the solid-but-unremarkable nature of the issue I’d read (And the complete silence of the comics press and blogosphere on the book).
Of course, now I can’t remember whose list it was, or where I saw the link to the list. So maybe there was no list; maybe it was all a dream.
Anyway, I began to wonder if it was actually great after all, and my local library had a copy of the hardcover, so I was able to read the whole series with zero financial risk.
Well?: Well, it’s not that great, and, despite the obviously high production value and extra care taken in it’s presentation, as a graphic novel, it’s not even a very good one.
But before I get into the story part of the book, I did want to say a few things about the overall package, which is a pretty nice one, especially by Marvel standards. Things that will probably drive this post way off topic, so bear with me (and/or just skim until you hit something that interests you).
Marvel has always been pretty terrible at graphic novel design, and if you’ve ever encountered their books in a big box bookstore, you’ll know exactly what I mean. A shelf or six full of Marvel books, shelved spine out, look almost identical—it’s a wall of black, with the identical Marvel logo and the title of the book on the spine, completely uniform, no matter what the book is or what the format is.
There’s some variation—glossier hardcovers will have gold lettering as opposed to the trade paperbacks’ red and white Marvel logo and individual title logos—but they all bleed together, with nothing jumping out. (The only exceptions are the digests, which are more colorful and often shelved with the manga, and the Essentials, which have a spine fat enough to accommodate a clearer presentation of the books’ logo, although they’re also always black).
Compared to the DC/Vertigo/WildStorm books, in which many series have their own trade dress and design, or the Fantagraphics and Drawn + Quarterly and AdHouse books, in which great care has been put into ensuring that the books look good from all angles, or especially the manga, which is a veritable candy-colored rainbow of eye-grabbing design, Marvel graphic novels look like small press text books for an economic class you have to take if you want to graduate.
Nothing particularly flashy is done on the spine of this trade—other than leading off the title with a bigger “Stephen King’s,” which may actually be all it needs to fly out of bookstores—but the overall package is a nice one.
The cover has the words “The Dark Tower” super-imposed over a much bigger “Stephen King,” which makes his name clearly visible, but without comically eclipsing the title of the actual books (as in Brad Meltzer’s first Justice League trade or Jodi Picoult’s Wonder Woman trade, for example. (Also, if you didn’t really scrutinize the fine print, you might even think King actually wrote the book, instead of serving as its “Creative Director and Executive Director,” as the credits page says).
Inside is a one-page introduction from Ralph Macchio, and an afterword by King, plus a brief How-I-Made-This-Comic-Look-So-Shitty section by Richard Isanove, and 24 pages of covers and variant covers, seemingly by every artist in Marvel’s employ: Joe Quesada, David Finch, Stuart Immonen, Leinil Francis Yu, John Romita Jr., Steve McNiven, Billy Tan, Olivier Coipel, Greg Land and J. Scott Campbell all contribute what amount to cowboy pin-ups.
All the extra material, particularly the text pieces, reminded me of the good old days of Marvel and DC trade paperbacks, when the graphic novel market was barely in existence (back when Watchmen, Maus, The Dark Knight Returns were the only things you were guaranteed to find in a bookstore; anything else was just gravy).
I’m old enough to remember when Marvel and DC generally only published trades of books that were so popular that there was no way for new readers to find the comic books themselves anymore, and that the trades existed to meet exceptional demand, and/or keep stories in print that were important in some way, stories that new direct market customers would want to read throughout the next several years, and “civilians” might pick up if they saw it in a bookstore or library.
In a way, that’s how you could tell a book was good. Sandman must be a much better series than Shade, The Changing Man or Doom Patrol, because it was in trade. Batman: A Death in The Family and A Lonely Place of Dying must be more important Batman stories than, say, Batman: Blind Justice or Batman: Year Three, because DC put the former out in a trade but not the latter.
These trades were treated as special occasions, and usually had introductions by name writers in other fields, or even other prominent comics writers, telling you how awesome they were in the beginning.
Now, introductions seem rare to the point of non-existent, and trades have lost that sense of the special. In fact, DC and Marvel seem to publish everything in trade now, without much thought for what audience might exist for it. (Teen Titans: Titans East is a trade, for example, and I was genuine surprised DC printed that once as a monthly comic book, let alone again as a book-book. Paul Dini’s Detecive Comics run is being collected along with non-Dini fill-in stories that were only solicited and published the first time to fill gaps in the monthly book’s schedule, not because they had anything to do with Dini’s story). For some reason, often time The Big Two seem to print their trades, like their comic books, for direct market readers who prefer that format, rather than for a wider audience.
So even if I wasn’t aware of all the relentless hype The Dark Tower received prior to the first issue’s release, if I was a customer flipping through this in a book store, it would certainly seem like it was a special occasion, compared to all the other Marvel and DC graphic novels on the nearby shelves.
What’s that?
Oh yeah, I used the word “shitty” to describe the way the book looks a few paragraphs back, didn’t I? Okay, that was pretty crass, and maybe a little mean-spirited, but this is not a very well put together comic book story, something which is even more remarkable when you consider the amount of effort that went into it.
The weaknesses in Jae Lee and Isanove’s art, and their failure to compliment or even match up with Peter David’s script throughout the story, isn’t quite the same as Ed Benes not being able to draw a single background in 22 pages or refrain from drawing a woman’s mostly-bare ass every six panels or so in Justice League of America; it’s not even Steve McNiven not drawing an actual big fight in the climax of Civil War, a story Marvel geared a majority of its comics line around.
This is worse. This is Marvel hyping a book like it was the second coming, this is Marvel garnering almost Death of Captain America non-comics-press attention (at the outset, anyway), this is comic shops opening at midnight to sell the first issue of a comic book!
Now, who actually does what on this book is a little mysterious, as the credits are so weird. What was King’s contribution, beyond the source material? I don’t know. There’s no “based on” credit for King, just the cryptic “Creative Director and Executive Director.” Robin Furth is credited for “Plotting and Consultation.” Third down the line with “Script” is Peter David.
I’ve no complaints on the story side of things really. I’m not a real fan of narration in comics in general, as it’s almost always unnecessary, but the narrator’s voice here is an interesting one—folksy and friendly and conspiratorial, it feels like the story is being told to you by an older relative, or someone sitting on a log across the campfire from you. I’m assuming the voice comes from the novels, as it’s peppered with the same slang that fuels the rest of the dialogue.
The names of places, charachters and conflicts are flung around with little to no introduction, and I felt a bit like I did watching a not very well-made sci-fi movie like, say, Chronicles of Riddick or Phantom Menace, where the characters seem to know a lot more than I do about everything, and I feel like I should know what they’re talking about.
While this happens as much in the seventh issue as in the first, it’s actually kind of almost a sort of pleasure, as I felt my way toward familiarity. I had no understanding of the setting in the first few issues—and kind of wished there was a recap page like in most Marvel comics—but by the end, I began to feel my way toward understanding. Is this in some post-apocalyptic future, I take it?
Part of my wrestling with the setting came down to Lee and Isanove’s art, as there is precious little in terms of addressing the setting. The book is almost devoid of establishing shots, a pretty basic tool in the comic book (or film…or TV) toolbox. It’s especially important in a book like this, set in a time or world not our own. Lee’s panels are all pretty sparse, and I never really got a sense of where anything was taking place, or what if anything differentiated Roland’s home town from the city to the east he spends most of the adventure in, or the wilderness around it, or the trails between them. Likewise, the interiors all looked the same, be they hut or witch’s house or mayor’s house, rough roadside bar or classy inn, Roland’s mom’s bedroom or hell itself.
The result was a little like watching a stage play, with much of the setting left to the imagination of the reader. That approach may not always be wrong for comics, but I think it usually is—one great and oft-cited advantage of comics over film, for example, is the ease with which the set is built. A Dark Tower movie would have had to build all these locales, scouted landscapes and sent helicopters with cameras into the air to capture them, while Lee could have delineated them with pencil and ink, if he so chose.
Compounding the problem is Lee’s relatively weak sequential storytelling abilities. I don’t know if it’s peculiar to this project, which likely had more cooks in the kitchen and higher production demands than some of his past work (fewer folks had to vet his Fantastic Four: 1, 2, 3, 4 or G. I. Joe/Transformers crossover, I’m sure), but Lee chooses extremely close shots of his characters in every scene, with long shots being few and far between. All are horizontal, perhaps going for a cinematic feel, and closely cropped, cutting out backgrounds and other characters.
It’s a bit like watching a movie composed completely of close-ups—when new characters enter a scene, it’s disorienting, because you’ve no idea who else is in the room or how many of them there are (There are a few times where this is particularly noticeable, as when our three young heroes attack a supposedly vastly superior force, and we see no more than two or three of their foes at a time, or when they supposedly face 200 men, and we see no more than ten or tenty).
While great comic book art will tell a story, even a large part of the story, through the imagery alone, Lee’s art makes no sense without the words, and in a lot of cases makes little sense with the words, or even seems to contradict them in little ways here and there.
Many of the panels seem like the covers of comic books or prog rock albums or cheap mass market paperback novels, but they don’t flow into one another very well, or at all. They’re highly posed, and don’t reflect the passage of time in the same way that the dialogue does.
In other words, it’s really beautiful looking terrible comic book art, if that makes sense.
Maybe it's easier to show some weak bits rather than simply describe them.

In the above section, the middle panel states that the two characters kiss. In that panel, however, they seem like they're about to kiss, or, perhaps, have just finished kissing. But in neither the preceding or following panel do they kiss. Lee apparently chose to draw around the significant event of the page, which the narration explicitly points out.
What happened to the dude on the right's horse's head? Or did he dismount, run over, jump up and punch the other dude? And given how much time it would take him to clear the distance between them, on his own horse or off, why was the other dude still caught off guard?
According to the character, he's holding a "long" knife, which appears to be about the size of his thumb in that panel. We don't see any other images of the knife in the scene to indicate it is, indeed, a long knife. 
The script makes clear within the next few pages what just happened, but it's impossible to tell from the part of the comic in which the event acutally occurs. Does that dude say "No, Dave?" because Dave is crumpling from an unseen, unheard blow from the person in the hat and coat? Or does he say "No, Dave" to keep Dave from maybe attacking that person?
What Isanove does to the art exactly isn’t entirely clear. Instead of being listed as colorist, he’s credit under “art” with Lee, and this seems in large part due to the degree of his contribution. Is he digitally inking Lee’s pencils? Trying to interpret the four-page “The Painted Process” segment at the end, that seems to be the case.
In eight steps, that feature demonstrates how Isanove constructed the first two-page spread on pages three and four from Lee’s “line art.” He starts with a photograph, tweaks it, adds Lee’s art, tweaks that, and keeps tweaking aspects until he gets to the finished product. That finished product is simply the grown-up Gunslinger posing on a rock, with a vulture flying nearby. It’s apparently dawn or sunset, as the sky seems aflame. It’s not a bad piece of art, but it’s damaging to the book as a whole, since almost every image is so luxuriously covered.In that opening shot, for example, the sky seems to be aflame. In the book’s second-to-last panel, also a two-page spread, a character is burned to death at the stake, I think. The background looks identical to the original one, though, and the only reason I think the character is on fire is because the words mention her hair and clothes being in flames, which is not the case in the art itself.
Clearly a ton of work went into putting this book together, and it’s really a shame that so much work must be done in the eye and the mind of the reader to make sense of it.
Would I travel back in time to buy it off the shelf?: No, this is actually a much better package to enjoy the story in than the monthly installments would have been. Each of the seven issues is structured so that there’s a cliffhanger at the ending, and an awful lot occurs in each issue, so I imagine it would have read just fine in monthly installments. But this version is free of all those super-irritating ads Marvel runs for Spider-Man fishing poles and Wolverine candy action figures or whatever, and includes what appears to be every single version of the one million variant covers.
I don’t know if this is the case or not, but it seems to me that variant covers encourage waiting-for-the-trade purchasing in direct market customers. I’m sure there must be a segment of the consumers who do actually speculate on variants or collect them (or at least, retailers speculate that such a segment exists, and thus buy enough copies to justify publishers continuing and increasing variant cover publishing), but to the rest of us whose only interest in variants might be seeing different artists draw the covers, it certainly makes more sense to wait for a trade which is more likely to have all the variants.
Take the Marvel Zombies series for example; the fresh variant covers on each new printing was a large factor in each issue selling out. But why re-buy each new printing for a new cover, if you can just wait a few months and get them all at once in the trade?
Anyway, this is hardly a must-own graphic novel for me, and I don’t think it’s a must-own for anyone who’s not a Dark Tower fan already, but, in retrospect, if I were going to have bought the series, I’d prefer to have the graphic novel, where I can at least get a neat John Romita Jr. pin-up of the Gunslinger in the back, without having to pay extra for it.
Tuesday, June 12, 2007
Some thoughts on two upcoming collections I'm not going to buy anyway
Two upcoming books that should have appeal far beyond the normal direct market readers. Two best-selling authors who have achieved popularity in prose and comics. Two remarkably similar and remarkably bad cover designs.
Let’s take an overly-, perhaps even obsessively-, detailed look at the trade dress for Justice League of America Vol. 1: The Tornado’s Path and Eternals. These images are both from the Baker & Taylor online catalog, which is where many libraries and retailers buy their books, so the trade dress and cover design may vary from what will be in your local comic shop (Marvel.com, for exmaple, lists' a "book market version," which seems to indicate the existence of an non-book market version.)
So this is what the cover of the first trade collection of Brad Meltzer and Ed Benes’ brief run on the newly relaunched Justice League of America series will look like:
It’s a hardcover that will be available in comic shops tomorrow, and, according to dccomics.com, it’s subtitled “The Tornado’s Path” and will contain “the first six issues” of the series. That seems a rather arbitrary number of issues, considering the first story arc was eight issues long, running from #0 through #7.
It’s an interesting to see the priority assigned to various elements of the series based just on the cover. Clearly, the selling point here is the creators, and not the team—their names are at least twice as big as that of the title (the volume number and actual title of the story doesn’t even appear on the cover).
I’m assuming that it’s the name of the writer here that is the actual selling point (Despite some well-received previous work, this is essentially Benes’ breakthrough title, and probably the first collection of a title he’s worked on that will be receiving this kind of big bookstore push), and that it would just look too silly if they blew up “Meltzer” to giant proportions, and had the pencil artist’s name as small as poor Sandra Hope’s there; a case in which not being on the cover at all would probably be better than the fine print listing she gets there.
Now, I’m not terribly familiar with Meltzer’s prose output, having never read any of it, nor ever having heard of him before he was announced as the writer of Identity Crisis (By the extremely subjective criteria of Prose Writers Who Caleb Has Personally Heard Of Prior To Their Comics Work, Michael Chabon, Jodi Picoult and Jonathan Lethem seem like bigger “gets” than Meltzer to me). But clearly DC thinks he’s a huge deal, and that’s the element of this collection that is going to best move it from bookstore shelves into the hands of browsers.
Presuming it’s true that the name “Meltzer” is more recognizable and attractive than the (admittedly clumsy and awkward to say) name “Justice League of America,” than it seems indicative of a major failing on DC’s part.
How is it that the Justice League of America, a team that includes Superman, one of the most recognizable characters in the world, along with Batman and Wonder Woman would have a lower Q Rating than a single author?
What really drew my attention to this cover in the first place, however, was the image. Considering the visual nature of comics—they don’t shelve these things under the title “Graphic Novels” for nothing—it’s strange to see one in which the imagery component is played down to such a degree in favor of the credits and text.
And why is that? Could it be that those at DC realize that cover artist Michael Turner is a terrible, terrible artist, but the direct market seems to like his stuff anyway, so they keep slapping it on their product to feed to fanboys, but, when the time comes to show their product off to the rest of the world, they’re a little hesitant to put Turner out front?
Remember, there have been two to three covers for each and every single issue of this series, meaning DC had plenty to choose from when it came time to put an image on this. They went with the Turner version of JLoA #2, removing the figures from that background-less image and reassigning it to another background-free space (which actually looks much better), and shrinking the team down so they are no longer the focus, and one’s eyes aren’t drawn to the lack of feet, or that weird toddler-who-has-to-pee pose that Vixen, Black Lightning and Red Arrow are all striking.
I probably would have went with the Benes image as a wraparound cover, as it features not only the whole team, but also a large swathe of DC heroes with which to dazzle newcomers (“Hey, it’s that Bat-Lesbian from the New York Times! And there’s Shazam from that shitty show I used to watch as a kid! And Supergirl!”), and the cheesy hand holding the membership cards reflects the cheesy (though affectionate) usage of nostalgia for 1960’s and ‘70’s Justice League protocol that permeates JLoA #7, the conclusion of “The Tornado’s Path” story (Although I guess that issue’s not even included in this collection…? For some reason…?)
And, most importantly, it’s by Benes, whose name is gigantic on the cover at the moment. Why not let browsers know what the interior art will actually look like on the cover?
I also find myself wondering about what the next collection, the inevitable volume 2, will look like.
The next story arc in JLoA is “The Lightning Saga,” which is one of those irritating crossovers that jumps from book to book, like “The Insiders” from Teen Titans and The Outsiders or “Checkout” from Outsiders and Checkmate. Since the two books it jumps back and forth between, JLoA and Justice Society of America, have will be collected in their own series of graphic novels, will “Lightning Saga” be JLoA Vol. 2, or JSoA Vol. 2, or a standalone, volume-less trade, simply entitled Lightning Saga or, perhaps, Justice League of America/Justice Society of America: The Lightning Saga (Jesus, let’s seem them fill all of that on a cover, and still have room for Meltzer and Geoff Johns’ names).
Does that mean the next volume, JLoA Vol. 2 will include #7, #11 and #12 and…that’s it?
Well, let’s turn our attention to Marvel’s upcoming trade of a series by a famous novelist, The Eternals. Here’s the cover for that:
Marvel does give top-billing to the stars of the series here, although seeing as it’s The Eternals, known primarily as the group of pseudo-mythic cosmic characters created by Jack Kirby who weren’t the The Mighty Thor’s Asgardians, the Inhumans or the New Gods. Considering that nobody outside of fandom knows who the hell the Eternals are—and an awful lot of people within fandom didn’t until this project was announced—it seems a little needless to give them top-billing, but then, the characters are what the company owns and trades in, so shouldn’t they always come first?
Marvel also makes the author’s name gigantic…even bigger than DC made Meltzer’s, choosing to accentuate his full name, not just his surname. This certainly makes sense; Gaiman’s name is probably equally well-known and appreciated equally among graphic novel readers and fantasy/science fiction readers, and it stands to reason bookstore browsers who may not have even read Sandman would see a big, bright gold “Neil Gaiman” and pick the book up just to see what this new work from the writer of Coraline is all about.
And poor John Romita Jr. Here’s a name that carries a ton of weight in the direct market, and, in the market in general, a lot more weight than, say, Ed Benes, and it’s like an afterthought on the cover, a disclaimer present just to let readers know that Gaiman did not, in fact, illustrate the thing himself). (If nothing else, most big bookstores will have all of JRjr’s issues of Amazing Spider-Man with JMS, as well as his The Black Panther: Who Is The Black Panther? and maybe the trades of his 12-issue Wolverine run with Mark Millar).
Like the JLoA cover, this one is curious in that it comes from a series in which every single issue has two-to-three covers to choose from, and Marvel ultimately decided to downplay the imagery as much as possible, coming up with a cover that is more than half text. In this case, I doubt it was any kind of embarrassment over the quality of the images, so much as a desire to accentuate Gaiman’s name as much as possible.
Personally, I find this a really unattractive cover, one that makes the whole package look really unappealing. If I didn’t know the name of the author, I wouldn’t look twice at this.
I didn’t care for the standard covers on this thing, the painted ones by Rick Berry. They not only weren’t representative of the interiors (it’s not like JRjr is a bad cover artist or anything), but they have a completely different aesthetic—JRjr is one of the industry’s more comic book-y comic book artists, and one who has at least a hint of Jack Kirby in his line and figure work. Berry is working in paint and in a highly representational style that is about as far from Kirby as you can get.
This image is a particularly generic one, and it looks like it could appear on just about anything in the science-fiction section. It doesn’t look like a graphic novel cover, it doesn’t look like a Marvel cover, it doesn’t look like the cover of a Gaiman trade or novel (that is, it’s not by Dave McKean), and it doesn’t look anything like 1602’s highly distinctive cover.
Based solely on these two covers, I wouldn’t read either of these trades. From DC and Marvel’s perspective, that’s a bad thing, but from a readers’ perspective, there’s nothing wrong with that. Neither of them are the best works from the company or the creators involved, nor are they the best stories featuring those characters.
Both have their bright spots, of course. JLoA has… Okay, well, there’s not much to like there, but Meltzer does finally put “Black Vulcan” in the Justice League, for which I’ll forgive him just about every other poor story choice he’s made in the process.
And Eternals is chockfull of beautiful, beautiful art and strong character work (even if it all adds to nothing).
And both will likely read much, much better in trade. “Tornado’s Path” was turgid beyond belief in a monthly format, and was clearly written to be read as a trade, and well, now’s your chance!
Eternals was likewise slow and written for the trade, more forgivable since it took place in a corner of the Marvel Universe and had little to do with the rest of the line (although the Civil War business that intrudes in the later portions will likely stand out awkwardly to newcomers here for the Gaiman, not the Marvel). There were also some odd, momentum killing delays in the release schedule.
Let’s take an overly-, perhaps even obsessively-, detailed look at the trade dress for Justice League of America Vol. 1: The Tornado’s Path and Eternals. These images are both from the Baker & Taylor online catalog, which is where many libraries and retailers buy their books, so the trade dress and cover design may vary from what will be in your local comic shop (Marvel.com, for exmaple, lists' a "book market version," which seems to indicate the existence of an non-book market version.)
So this is what the cover of the first trade collection of Brad Meltzer and Ed Benes’ brief run on the newly relaunched Justice League of America series will look like:
It’s a hardcover that will be available in comic shops tomorrow, and, according to dccomics.com, it’s subtitled “The Tornado’s Path” and will contain “the first six issues” of the series. That seems a rather arbitrary number of issues, considering the first story arc was eight issues long, running from #0 through #7.It’s an interesting to see the priority assigned to various elements of the series based just on the cover. Clearly, the selling point here is the creators, and not the team—their names are at least twice as big as that of the title (the volume number and actual title of the story doesn’t even appear on the cover).
I’m assuming that it’s the name of the writer here that is the actual selling point (Despite some well-received previous work, this is essentially Benes’ breakthrough title, and probably the first collection of a title he’s worked on that will be receiving this kind of big bookstore push), and that it would just look too silly if they blew up “Meltzer” to giant proportions, and had the pencil artist’s name as small as poor Sandra Hope’s there; a case in which not being on the cover at all would probably be better than the fine print listing she gets there.
Now, I’m not terribly familiar with Meltzer’s prose output, having never read any of it, nor ever having heard of him before he was announced as the writer of Identity Crisis (By the extremely subjective criteria of Prose Writers Who Caleb Has Personally Heard Of Prior To Their Comics Work, Michael Chabon, Jodi Picoult and Jonathan Lethem seem like bigger “gets” than Meltzer to me). But clearly DC thinks he’s a huge deal, and that’s the element of this collection that is going to best move it from bookstore shelves into the hands of browsers.
Presuming it’s true that the name “Meltzer” is more recognizable and attractive than the (admittedly clumsy and awkward to say) name “Justice League of America,” than it seems indicative of a major failing on DC’s part.
How is it that the Justice League of America, a team that includes Superman, one of the most recognizable characters in the world, along with Batman and Wonder Woman would have a lower Q Rating than a single author?
What really drew my attention to this cover in the first place, however, was the image. Considering the visual nature of comics—they don’t shelve these things under the title “Graphic Novels” for nothing—it’s strange to see one in which the imagery component is played down to such a degree in favor of the credits and text.
And why is that? Could it be that those at DC realize that cover artist Michael Turner is a terrible, terrible artist, but the direct market seems to like his stuff anyway, so they keep slapping it on their product to feed to fanboys, but, when the time comes to show their product off to the rest of the world, they’re a little hesitant to put Turner out front?
Remember, there have been two to three covers for each and every single issue of this series, meaning DC had plenty to choose from when it came time to put an image on this. They went with the Turner version of JLoA #2, removing the figures from that background-less image and reassigning it to another background-free space (which actually looks much better), and shrinking the team down so they are no longer the focus, and one’s eyes aren’t drawn to the lack of feet, or that weird toddler-who-has-to-pee pose that Vixen, Black Lightning and Red Arrow are all striking.
I probably would have went with the Benes image as a wraparound cover, as it features not only the whole team, but also a large swathe of DC heroes with which to dazzle newcomers (“Hey, it’s that Bat-Lesbian from the New York Times! And there’s Shazam from that shitty show I used to watch as a kid! And Supergirl!”), and the cheesy hand holding the membership cards reflects the cheesy (though affectionate) usage of nostalgia for 1960’s and ‘70’s Justice League protocol that permeates JLoA #7, the conclusion of “The Tornado’s Path” story (Although I guess that issue’s not even included in this collection…? For some reason…?)
And, most importantly, it’s by Benes, whose name is gigantic on the cover at the moment. Why not let browsers know what the interior art will actually look like on the cover? I also find myself wondering about what the next collection, the inevitable volume 2, will look like.
The next story arc in JLoA is “The Lightning Saga,” which is one of those irritating crossovers that jumps from book to book, like “The Insiders” from Teen Titans and The Outsiders or “Checkout” from Outsiders and Checkmate. Since the two books it jumps back and forth between, JLoA and Justice Society of America, have will be collected in their own series of graphic novels, will “Lightning Saga” be JLoA Vol. 2, or JSoA Vol. 2, or a standalone, volume-less trade, simply entitled Lightning Saga or, perhaps, Justice League of America/Justice Society of America: The Lightning Saga (Jesus, let’s seem them fill all of that on a cover, and still have room for Meltzer and Geoff Johns’ names).
Does that mean the next volume, JLoA Vol. 2 will include #7, #11 and #12 and…that’s it?
Well, let’s turn our attention to Marvel’s upcoming trade of a series by a famous novelist, The Eternals. Here’s the cover for that:
Marvel does give top-billing to the stars of the series here, although seeing as it’s The Eternals, known primarily as the group of pseudo-mythic cosmic characters created by Jack Kirby who weren’t the The Mighty Thor’s Asgardians, the Inhumans or the New Gods. Considering that nobody outside of fandom knows who the hell the Eternals are—and an awful lot of people within fandom didn’t until this project was announced—it seems a little needless to give them top-billing, but then, the characters are what the company owns and trades in, so shouldn’t they always come first? Marvel also makes the author’s name gigantic…even bigger than DC made Meltzer’s, choosing to accentuate his full name, not just his surname. This certainly makes sense; Gaiman’s name is probably equally well-known and appreciated equally among graphic novel readers and fantasy/science fiction readers, and it stands to reason bookstore browsers who may not have even read Sandman would see a big, bright gold “Neil Gaiman” and pick the book up just to see what this new work from the writer of Coraline is all about.
And poor John Romita Jr. Here’s a name that carries a ton of weight in the direct market, and, in the market in general, a lot more weight than, say, Ed Benes, and it’s like an afterthought on the cover, a disclaimer present just to let readers know that Gaiman did not, in fact, illustrate the thing himself). (If nothing else, most big bookstores will have all of JRjr’s issues of Amazing Spider-Man with JMS, as well as his The Black Panther: Who Is The Black Panther? and maybe the trades of his 12-issue Wolverine run with Mark Millar).
Like the JLoA cover, this one is curious in that it comes from a series in which every single issue has two-to-three covers to choose from, and Marvel ultimately decided to downplay the imagery as much as possible, coming up with a cover that is more than half text. In this case, I doubt it was any kind of embarrassment over the quality of the images, so much as a desire to accentuate Gaiman’s name as much as possible.
Personally, I find this a really unattractive cover, one that makes the whole package look really unappealing. If I didn’t know the name of the author, I wouldn’t look twice at this.
I didn’t care for the standard covers on this thing, the painted ones by Rick Berry. They not only weren’t representative of the interiors (it’s not like JRjr is a bad cover artist or anything), but they have a completely different aesthetic—JRjr is one of the industry’s more comic book-y comic book artists, and one who has at least a hint of Jack Kirby in his line and figure work. Berry is working in paint and in a highly representational style that is about as far from Kirby as you can get.
This image is a particularly generic one, and it looks like it could appear on just about anything in the science-fiction section. It doesn’t look like a graphic novel cover, it doesn’t look like a Marvel cover, it doesn’t look like the cover of a Gaiman trade or novel (that is, it’s not by Dave McKean), and it doesn’t look anything like 1602’s highly distinctive cover.
Based solely on these two covers, I wouldn’t read either of these trades. From DC and Marvel’s perspective, that’s a bad thing, but from a readers’ perspective, there’s nothing wrong with that. Neither of them are the best works from the company or the creators involved, nor are they the best stories featuring those characters.
Both have their bright spots, of course. JLoA has… Okay, well, there’s not much to like there, but Meltzer does finally put “Black Vulcan” in the Justice League, for which I’ll forgive him just about every other poor story choice he’s made in the process.
And Eternals is chockfull of beautiful, beautiful art and strong character work (even if it all adds to nothing).
And both will likely read much, much better in trade. “Tornado’s Path” was turgid beyond belief in a monthly format, and was clearly written to be read as a trade, and well, now’s your chance!
Eternals was likewise slow and written for the trade, more forgivable since it took place in a corner of the Marvel Universe and had little to do with the rest of the line (although the Civil War business that intrudes in the later portions will likely stand out awkwardly to newcomers here for the Gaiman, not the Marvel). There were also some odd, momentum killing delays in the release schedule.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)




