Superhero novels

Nobody Gets The Girl - James Maxey. Heard about this novel on NPR some time back. When I picked it up from the library, was a bit surprised to see it was from 2003.

The novel concerns a young man by the name of Richard Rogers. He has a good day job, a devoted wife, and a home. Yet, he's bored with it all, feels his work as a stand-up comic in the evenings is his true calling. He sees the world as being a joke. It's a world where scientists talk about enclosing cities in domes, where a 100 ft baby doll with a giant pistol for a head sows havoc and destruction in Seattle. He fantasizes about going on the road as a full-time comic, leaving his life behind. Be careful what you wish for.

He wakes up the next day, only his house has different furniture and an older couple lives there. What's worse, he finds that he's invisible and intangible to them.

Eventually, he falls in with Dr. Know, a wealthy mad scientist who thinks he created the universe and is bent on saving the world from Rex Monday, and Know's beautiful daughters: the Thrill who can fly and make people do as she wishes and Rail Blade, a woman with complete mastery over iron including seemingly building metallic rails to skate along and armor and weapons from trace elements around.

The main strength of the novel is it tells the story completely from the point of view of Rogers, now calling himself Nobody. His everyman status, with his small hopes, dreams and fears, given both the gift and curse of non-perceived existence.is ably portrayed and contrasts well against the larger craziness and absurdity of the world and a war he doesn't understand.

The other strength of the novel is its brevity. There's no excess padding, and moves at a quick pace with plenty of suspense and action.

This is a strength primarily because despite the claim to have read many comics, the story is that of "superhero as literature".  As many modern comics and other superhero novels, it seems to miss the actual point of superheroes. The modern take seems to be that for superheroes and their stories to be taken seriously they have to be about the ineffectiveness of superheroes. As Nobody, the narrator is often a voyeur, the Thrill uses her mind control abilities to make people give her things as opposed to paying for them, while Rail Blade has shut herself off from empathy and willing to kill. Meanwhile, Dr. Know follows the cliche and fate of other comic superheroes whose chief power is that of super-intelligence or "superhero as god" ie a step from insanity and ascribing to a super-morality that allows him to pursue his goals of the greater good despite the loss of life and collateral damage.

Despite all those comics the author supposedly read, the influence of Moore's "Watchmen" and Ozymandias and Dr. Manhattan in particular loom large over the character of Dr. Know. For the literati of comicbook creators seem unable to truly envision geniuses that are truly smarter than their writers nor heroes as being nobler than ourselves (or that we should truly aspire to such concepts). He gets some kudos to recognize the true barrier of peace is that hate is so strong and indoctrinated when young. Take away the tanks and guns, and in places where hate and the divides are so strong, they'll just pick up rocks and sticks. I'm reminded of recent news of clashes between Buddhists and Muslims. Guns and bullets aren't needed. Despite that positive turn, it's still Dr. Know not being smart enough to recognize that himself and ultimately coming to the same conclusion and resolution that Ozymandias does, Peace not through uniting people in Hope, but in uniting them in Fear of an even worse Other out there than the one we know.


If superheroes originally were expressions of wish fulfillment of young men (many minorities) in time of War, crime, poverty and the Great Depression, Superheroes as Literature are more concerned with the fetishness of heroes and involved in their sex lives. I was reminded of  "Fort Freak", a Wild Cards novel edited by George R. R. Martin, where writers seemed more concerned having their characters act out fantasies of being with younger women and menage a trois relationships. Here, the narrator, a voyeur himself, serves as an avatar for the reader and manages to be the ideal sexual partner of the superhero babes (while the traditional relationship is portrayed as boring and dull, an ideal life for those that are content to be "nobodies" but not for those who aspire for more).

City of Heroes: The Freedom Phalanx: The late lamented City of Heroes game seemed to get superheroes better than the actual comics did. When comics were mocking heroes, especially with capes, the game embraced them. When it was first launched, capes weren't part of the costume package, reportedly through the difficulty in the animating of them across the board. However, it was one of the most requested features to be added! It just shows how far out of touch those that think superheroes need to be made fun of really are.

I've had "The Freedom Phalanx" book in my possession for awhile, but only recently got around to reading it, mainly because of going through withdrawal of playing the game. Reading the book was only partially successful in that once it was done, I missed the game more because I WANTED MORE! I want more books like this. I want more comics like this. I wanted to play the game again, to design my own heroes or revisiting some that I created like Mr. Muscles, The Horned Owl, and Captain Amazon.

The book is set in the past of the game, when the current legendary heroes of The Freedom Phalanx were a mixture of novices and established heroes who don't necessarily play well with each other. Novice heroes Positron and Synapse are seeing Paragon City crumbling under disillusionment and apathy. The original Freedom Phalanx has long disbanded, it's members dead or scattered. There are new heroes about, but none of the new ones have the clout and name recognition to truly rally the city. This pair wants and hopes to get some of the experienced heroes together to reform the old group in an attempt to turn the city around. However, there's also a criminal plot, their own arch-nemeses and their own concerns they have to face, and that it's somehow all tied to the Mayoral race.

Robin Laws is able to keep the heroes heroic and still come across as human with human wants and desires and real life concerns. Statesman is basically immortal and he's sidelined by watching his wife basically slowly die in old age from cancer and realizing that he will probably see this happen to everyone he loves, his daughter, his grand-daughter, his friends. The only constant in his life seems to be the fighting with his arch-enemy Lord Recluse, with neither gaining an upper hand for long. Synapse wants a regular life that his powers make impossible for him. Manticore, a cross between Batman and Green Arrow, is obsessive. He's obsessed with holding up the legacy of his father, the original Manticore. And, he's obsessed with bringing down his father's chief foe. Sister Psyche's mental powers are so strong that she basically shuts the world out and seems to slowly be spiraling into full blown depression. Despite this, the book doesn't come across depressing or mocking the heroes. It embraces superheroes and that their stories are ones of characters overcoming obstacles, both external and internal. And it recognizes that the genre is one of action and adventure as well as mystery. The plot of the super-villains is full on pulp/supevillain mastermind style but it all works and hangs together. It's the type of story you long for the days when the Justice League and Avengers comics were like this.

A fun read and a wonderful George Perez cover. And, sadly, no more.

Earth 2

Earth 2: DC has released images coming from their next wave of books, promoting an Earth -2 line. There's the book titled Earth-2 and then a "World's Finest" title featuring Power Girl and Huntress.

Most of the online chatter seems to be about Power Girl's costume redesign. Admittedly, this is a bad design. More uses of armor where it's not needed, extraneous seams for no purpose. I can understand getting rid of the boob window, but editorial mandate for covering the legs but allowing bare arms?  Who is this person in editorial that has a thing against sleeves?

Everybody seems so caught up on her breasts they don't realize the basic change in hers and Helena Wayne's characters that the cover suggests. Power Girl and Huntress were not ashamed of their pedigrees but they still debuted as women who forged their own identities and not to be immediately defined by or serve as reflections of their male mentors. Yet the cover suggests that on this new Earth-2, they were originally Supergirl and Robin. That lessens them more than changing her costume. She's had worse.

It's indicative of a slight double standard and message being sent. Look at the Batman family of books. In addition to Batman, the white men that are or were sidekicks and being featured in books: Robin, Red Robin, Red Hood, Nightwing. Now, the Batman Family book featuring a man of African descent: Batwing. The ones featuring women: Batgirl, Batwoman. All direct reflection of the head of the tamily so to speak. And, now we have a character that originally debuted as a woman with her own identity but honoring the legacies of both mother and father being retconned as once being a sidekick with a white man's former identity.

And, with Power Girl, being her own woman and not riding Superman's coat-tails was part and parcel of the whole point of her. I will probably still check it out. Levitz is the writer who has some history with these characters and artwork's by Perez and Maguire so it will definitely look good.

On that note, it's hard to get optimistic about "Earth-2" by James Robinson. This is an alternate cover and it shows us yet another heavily redesigned Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman. Speculation is that they are legacies up there, Dick Grayson as Batman and who knows as the other two. Which of course was what his Justice League title was.

Then, there's this little line from the solicits: You may think you know Earth 2…but this is DC Comics – The New 52, where anything can happen!

Ok, the thing is, title something Earth-2 and there are reasonable expectations. Not only that, the whole point of Earth-2 was not simply an alternate Earth with an alternate history. It allowed DC to be new with Barry Allen as Flash, Hal Jordan as Green Lantern while EMBRACING their original history and heritage. It was about KEEPING as much history as they could. Over time, some changes and legacies came in, but it was always about maintaining a sense of history and what went before. You start making wholesale changes, and it's really no different than other titles. Especially right now with a freshly launched DCU. The main titles are already of a new universe that readers are getting acclimated to, including new histories and backgrounds featuring Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman. The regular universe is already an "alternate universe" for readers as it's substantially different from what went before. You might be making use of the names and ideas, but it's not really the original characters. It should be noted that while Roy Thomas launched an Earth-2 legacy book in "Infiniti Inc." there was already a title in place and doing alright that was about the originals and history: "All-Star Squadron". Also, that first round of Infinitors, while legacy characters, they were not replacement characters. Like Power Girl and Huntress, they reflected their origins but they were their own identities. The originals were still around. Oh well.

Didn't take too long for them to return to type. The book is not even out yet but is already talked about mattering to the main continuity, that it will tie in to the main continuity down the road. Not a mistake that the cover has them fighting what looks like Parademons.

Meanwhile, that same month, hopefully you're keeping up with what's going on in one of the main Batman books as its plotline will highjack the story across the various Bat-family lines including the Jonah Hex book! So much for not trying to turn away potential new readers.

Also just reported, the re-launch has apparently hurt sales of the trade market. Are they really surprised? The comic book shared-universe business plan is built on a basic model driving sales. 1) The Collector mentality that has fans searching out back issues (and now trades and such)  and driving that 2) Past stories matter. Thus first issue appearances go up in value and highly sought after. The company rarely gets any of that money in the pre-Trade days but it helped their distributors' sales and helps make fans feel like they are part of the club, sharing and seeking after gems at shows and such.


I couldn't help but think at the time after "Crisis on Infinite Earths" and the subsequent reboots that came in the years after, this had to hurt back issue sales somewhat. After all, what does it matter what Krypto's first appearance was if he no longer existed? You have the company basically saying the character doesn't matter. Pre-Crisis Superboy and Supergirl? All the Legion of Super-Heroes reboots? Hawkman? At the time there was no real way to track that kind of effect since the trade market really didn't exist as it does now, but it seemed logical that if new stories weren't potentially fueling interest in the back-market, it would start dying down. The only possible evidence we have of it is the steady demise of the comic stores. One store I go to does a pretty good business on back-issues but he says it's because many stores don't make back-issues a priority any more.


Now, we have a strong trade market, reprinting everything not nailed down. We can see how rebooting and the company basically saying their old stuff doesn't matter can negatively impact sales of that same material, essentially drive down the value of their library. What will they learn from this if anything?

Forget a Reboot, can we get a Reset?

I was in Target the other day, getting some dental floss and fishing line, but otherwise browsing. Takes me about 30 minutes, my wife 3 hours and then she can go back in a week. Me? I'm good for a month. Anywho, I'm cutting through the aisles from the back of the store and end up going through stuff for school kids where I see a couple of floppy binders for papers based on comics. One is Wonder Woman. The other is the Justice League. Only, it's a Justice League cover by Perez from 1983! It includes some other marketing artwork from about the same time (judging by the appearance of Starfire). The source of the Wonder Woman artwork is not readily apparent, but the design also places it from about the same time period.

It highlights a problem with much of the DC comics. Here's material marketed for kids. But, it's material from almost three decades ago! Makes sense, because that's the last time that most of these characters still looked iconic. Hawkman hadn't been changed to wearing body armor with mechanical wings. Firestorm hadn't gone through his transformation into a fire elemental, much less other changes. Aquaman hadn't had worn his blue costume much less grown long hair, a beard, lose a hand and become the sour underwater character. Hal Jordan hadn't yet gone crazy and been replaced nor taken on the job of the Spectre. Elongated Man hadn't gone through a succession of bad costumes, was still alive and not more or less replaced by Plastic Man. The Atom was still happily married and the second and latest person to make use of the name.

Marketing obviously recognized something that the people writing the comics don't. Building a brand demands a bit of consistency. Not knocking creativity and trying different things, but there's inherent problems when trying to shake things up and write creative stories. If you go too far, change too much, you weaken the brand. Take Aquaman. When fans talk about what they think it will take to make the character successful and what they want out of the character, it's divided. Some people want the pre-Crisis Aquaman. Others want the Peter David version. In an effort to modernize the character and get away from the jibes the character often gets, the David version ultimately proved polarizing. It was good for short-term sales, but now it's an "either-or" proposition. Despite the acclaim of David's series, the Aquaman that's marketable is the one in orange and green. Kyle Raynor as Green Lantern did the same thing for that franchise. You can see the polarizing of fans over Blue Beetle and Firestorm, only with the added fuel of racism charges if you so happen to like the original versions over the newer ones. Or those that like Morrison's Doom Patrol versus the ones that didn't. Truman and Ostrander's Hawkworld proved to be damaging to the whole concept of the DCU as a shared continuity that the character nor company fully recovered from.

I'm not saying that the modern versions were badly done. But, they were badly thought out. When Superman became the electric blue Superman, it wasn't thought to be permanent. Likewise the death of Superman that launched several new characters. They were temporary changes to the status quos that allowed some character exploration. When John Walker took over the identity of Captain America while Steve became the Captain, it was obviously nothing more than a chapter in the ongoing story. Status quos were reset in about a year's time or less.  Peter David claims that he was going to restore Aquaman's status quo when he was done, but there was no sign of that in the actual book. When Morrison was done with the Doom Patrol, every previous member was dead or completely changed into an unrecognizable character and the team hasn't been able to recover.

DC seemed to recognize that a little bit. Hal Jordan was made Green Lantern again. Barry Allen returned as the Flash. Somewhere, Ray Palmer is the Atom. Recently Aquaman was brought back in his green & orange suit. Hawk and Dove returned. But, for each course correction we get Firestorm struggling out a compromise solution between the Ronnie Raymond and Jason Rusch fans. PC versions of the Question and Blue Beetle. Roy Harper (Speedy/Arsenal) becoming villainous and a cyborg. Green Arrow killing criminals again, still ruining his relationship with Black Canary. Hawkman maiming opponents. Wonder Woman gets a badly designed costume. Superman and Batman both absent from their core books for extended period of time at the same time. Redesigned and "revamped" versions of the Red Circle and pulp heroes to the point they have little to nothing in common with the source material.

So, I was thinking, "What DC needs is a reboot of all characters to about the 1983 continuity."
I was a bit surprised when it was announced that DC was indeed rebooting their line. With talk of making characters a bit younger, stories accessible. Sadly, it also carried buzzwords like "modern". In fact, what makes sense about saying Jim Lee is going to redesign 52 characters so that they are more modern and recognizable? How do you redesign Wonder Woman, the Flash, Superman or Batman to make them MORE recognizable? The very nature of redesigning an iconic look is the EXACT OPPOSITE of their proposed intent. Then, there's the inherent conflict of goals. Making something modern doesn't make something necessarily recognizable. As I started off with, the problem is that DC has some iconic designs, but they and Hollywood seem intent on moving AWAY from them when what they need to do is move back towards them. The designs of the characters have stood the test of time for decades with minimal tweaking. I have no problem with redesigns, if the character truly needs it. But, the goal shouldn't be MODERN. It should be TIMELESSNESS. There's a reason when talking about character designs, people mention words like "iconic" and "classic". Most costumes are iconic because they are timeless. This usually means there's a simplicity and instantly identifiable and reproducible elements to the costume. Don't know who said it, but a comment I liked was a good costume should generally be akin to one that an eight year old can reproduce in his own drawings. The recent Doom Patrol relaunch had new uniforms for the team, with piping and such. Not bad designs per se, but instantly forgettable in they were not only generic but needlessly busy with extraneous details. When redesigning costumes, one should look at a few factors. Has this costume been worn for two decades or more and do you understand the difference between "classic" and "dated"? Was it designed by Gil Kane/Steve Ditko/Jack Kirby/Dave Cockrum? If the answer is "yes" to either of these, then the answer to redesigning the costume should 95% of the time be "Hell no".

The other problem is that they have ONE artist and writer redesigning the line. On the artist end, it's an artist whose last design has met a lot of resistance and who has yet to produce a design that can be said to stand the test of time. Not to say he isn't talented and produces pretty pictures. But, a less than zero track record. On the writer end... the concept of a "planned" shared universe just doesn't work. Every company that has tried to launch a planned universe with a central vision has ultimately failed. EVERY. ONE. Valiant. Dark Horse. Marvel's New Universe. Malibu (with two different universes). Defiant. DC doesn't even have to look any further than last year with their Pulp and Red Circle launches. Yes, I know. Red Circle was within the context of their regular Universe, but it was still formed, linked and sold on mainly one man's name who had nothing to do with it after creating the bible and the first issues. Not saying go in without a plan. But, what made DC and Marvel work was that it was organic. Continuity was built by telling stories, usually trying not to conflict with events elsewhere. It wasn't about continuity in and of itself. However, launches like this ARE about continuity, even when it's trashing old continuity and establishing new ones. (There actually is ONE exception: Marvel's Ultimate line which is still going strong. However, it's a shared universe that is built on the concept of a previous one, not an all new continuity. Even when it's going somewhere different, it cannot help but be a reflection of the main line. I don't read the comics, but I've never seen any advertising for pushing a NEW character in the Ultimate Universe that didn't already exist elsewhere.) Unless you're Kirby, one creator generally doesn't have that much creative variety in him to really fuel a whole universe. And, even Kirby's Fourth World books didn't succeed.

The first descriptions and covers of the relaunched titles further shows that while they seem to recognize that the line has problems, characters too convoluted and written into corners to the point of not being viable, they don't seem to realize the source of the problem. From indicators, Captain Atom has nothing to do with any previous version, visually or story wise. Striving for a compromise with Firestorm, he is now Ronnie Raymond AND Jason Rusch who are high school buddies. The Hawkman description tells us a little about Carter Hall but not anything about Hawkman himself, other than it seems to be an all new take on the character with some nods to original elements. It was messing with the concepts to begin with that lead to he mess we're in. It's partly why Red Circle and the pulp line failed as it sacrificed built in readership and built in character identification. It's why Target has binders with artwork of the characters as they were 30 years ago. Green Arrow and Mr. Terrific sound like they could be all right, but the redesigns are horrible. The latter looks like he stole a costume from the Emo-LSH and reflects none of the character's legacy and history, but otherwise he didn't need a new universe setting to launch a book. It looks more like change for change sake in his case. Green Arrow's costume looks like it came from Hollywood and is overly busy and looks fated for early shredding and return to a more classic look. The fact that Green Arrow has been written into corners twice now by being taken too far from center and requiring a resetting and looking at what's being solicited with other heroes, doesn't bode well that the creators have learned anything from the past.


If anything, the ability to reboot and reset seems to allow writers the freedom to continually move characters in extreme directions as well as the freedom to just ignore or contradict what a previous creator wrote just last month. Every writer that came along felt the need to redefine or rewrite the origin of Powergirl, Donna Troy. Or a new Legion of Superheroes every couple of years after previous writers kill off several characters. We're not seeing anything in the new reboot that DC has learned from that, instead just the opposite. With new and ugly designs, more casual rewriting of some pasts and leaving some in place (such as Blackest Night), it's setting up for more of the same mistakes they've been making and the problems that have plagued DC since post-Crisis on Infinite Earths. The exact opposite from what they need if the goal is to make the characters memorable. Want them to be memorable, don't make long term lasting changes every time the wind blows. Get back to telling compelling action and adventure stories using continuity as a tool and backdrop but not making the stories be about continuity. The one book that looks the most appealing to me is Aquaman. In part because his costume is the least re-designed although now he seems to be incomplete unless he's carrying a trident weapon, much as Bucky now must always be shown with a gun. Ironically, the title will be by the artist I took to task for not knowing how to draw gloves and drawing his gloves inconsistently from one panel to the next.

The Firestorm description makes me wonder if Blue Beetle will be the same. I think we can safely assume it's NOT going to be Ted Kord, the question is will he still be dead, a mentor to Jaimie or just written out of continuity altogether?

Edinburgh by Gaslight

I am a Sherlock Holmes nut. Now, my knowledge is not encyclopedic of all things Holmes-ian or Sir Arthur; I couldn't rattle off all sorts of minor trivia such as how many steps are on the stoop of 221-B. I don't take him so seriously that it hinders my enjoyment of movies like Without a Clue or Young Sherlock Holmes. However, I love reading Doyle's stories of the Great Detective as well as other works of his such as Rodney Stone, The Lost World and various short story collections. I enjoy reading the various pastiches to varying degrees, especially August Derleth's Solar Pons stories that grew beyond that limitation. I have all sorts of books with Holmes and about Holmes, some by Doyle and some not. My enjoyment of Doyle's stories led me to reading other detective fiction of the time as well as modern writers takes on Victorian era mysteries such as Anne Perry's wonderful Mr. Monk series. My favorite actor in the role of Holmes has to be Jeremy Brett in the great Granada produced series. However, I've developed a fondness for the Ronald Howard and Howard Marion-Crawford series. Jonathan Pryce does a good job as a slightly older version of the character in The Bakerstreet Irregulars. Matt Frewer and Rupert Everett are best left forgotten as are most others with American actors in the role. One can only wonder what we're going to see in 2010 from Guy Ritchie and Robert Downey, Jr.

I also enjoy shows like CSI, Criminal Minds, Law & Order. Of late, I couldn't help but think that a great show would be something that combined the two genres, a mystery series set in Victorian times dealing with the science and culture of the times. Something not too dissimilar to Caleb Carr's book The Alienist.

This is all a lead-in to the fact that last weekend my gal checked out of the library a two-disc DVD set of a British series called "Murder Rooms". Not included was the pilot, this contained 4 episodes: The Patient's Eyes, The Photographer's Chair, The Kingdom of Bones, and The White Knight Strategm. I'd never heard of the series, at its core is the fact that Doyle based Holmes on his medical professor Dr. James Bell who during an examination could proceed to give a life history of the patient based on observation and deductive reasoning. It's not a big leap then for a creative writer to come up with stories that team the two in a Holmes and Watson relationship and involve them in mysteries of their own. Indeed, Doyle has appeared in books such as Frost's The List of Seven, though with a different Holmes stand-in. This series of 90-minute mysteries are based on such a series of mystery novels.

The first disc with "The Patient's Eyes" and "The Photographer's Chair" are the better two I think. They also are a bit spookier with a heavier feel of menace that pervades them. The first starts off shortly after Doyle has graduated from medical school and starting his practice as a doctor. He has as an attractive patient with eye trouble and she talks about how she is often followed by a mysterious bicycler along an otherwise deserted remote road. This is also the set-up of the Holmes story "The Solitary Cyclist", one of his better I feel. While the set-up is definitely familiar, the story goes in other directions.

"The Photographer's Chair" deals with dead bodies appearing with signs of being bound and choked. When one victim's brother says that his sister will appear in a seance and prove his innocence, we start venturing towards the supernatural. Heavy in this show is Doyle's own struggles with the senseless death of his wife from some time before. The wound here seems so raw, yet this sadness is absent in the other episodes. But, it provides a rationale and foundation for Doyles fascination with spiritualism later in life.

"The Kingdom of Bones" has a great set-up as the unwrapping of an ancient mummy reveals a not so distant murder. We meet a character that is very reminiscent of Doyle's Professor Challenger especially in his disdain for the press, a reference to "the giant rat of Sumatra" and even a bit of boxing. However, it's a bit more adventure oriented than mystery.

"The White Knight Strategm" switches gears as it involves Doyle travelling back to Edinburgh in order to help Bell with a case. We also meet Doyle's father, touched upon in the previous episode, who is in an asylum. There is a strange and uncomfortable question raised about the treatment of family when they become ill and cannot support themselves. A detective on the case that Doyle and Bell butt heads with is supporting his wife who had suffered such a severe stroke she is barely cognizant of surroundings and must be hand fed. He does so out of duty and vows as opposed to sending her to an asylum such as Doyle's own paranoid delusional father is in. You see the moral conflict in Doyle's face, the detective's words and actions come across partly as unintended judgment and condemnation. The episode ends with hints of more but as this has been seven years ago, and the actor playing Bell passed away in February '07.

The lead actors, Charles Edwards as Doyle and Ian Richardson as Bell, are great in their roles. They seem more real than Watson and Holmes as they should be. Doyle is smart and clever, not quite so the blunderer as Watson. Bell is intelligent but very human and prone to human mistakes and humor. He's not as artificially arrogant, emotionally blunted or theatrically flamboyant as Holmes could be. The friendship between the two come off as genuine and heartfelt, it would be hard to watch the pilot with a different actor as Doyle, the two play off each other so well here. It is interesting to note that the dvd case lists comic-book based movies for each of the two in telling who they are. Charles Edwards had a small role in Batman Begins while Richardson who has had a long and lustrous career is credited with a role in From Hell. Richardson also played Holmes himself in 1983 productions of The Sign of Four, and The Hound of the Baskervilles (That has to be up there for one of the most filmed novels of all time. Please stop) and the voice of Doyle in the tv series The Great War and the Shaping of the 20th Century. The role that most Americans will remember of my generation will probably be that of the Rolls Royce owner stopping other drivers and asking "Pardon me, do you have any Grey Poupon?"

Comics

Final Crisis: Legion of 3 Worlds: This is pretty much the only Final Crisis mini I'll be getting. And it's mainly because of the work by stellar artist George Perez. When you have a book with this big a scope and this many superheroic characters, Perez is not only the natural choice, he's really about the only choice. If there is any drawback to the series, it's I have to echo Superboy-Prime's sentiments that the older Legion costumes are better than this Emo-Legion. Lightning Lad's long-haired bad boy look, ugh. And, when did he get so whiny? Is there a sleeve shortage in the future? I was never a big fan of Cockrum's art, but most of his costume designs were near perfect. Poor Timber Wolf and Polar Boy tend to look worse with each re-boot.

Guardians of the Galaxy: SI catches up the GG team, for no real reason other than it's crossover-itis. Normally, this title would seem a natural for the skrulls to show up in, but with their big push on Earth and all of the titles that resolve around it, it just seems a little forced to have it also hijack the storyline of this book that takes place nowhere near Earth and has very little to with the happenings on Earth. Otherwise, it has some good plot bits and mistrust is sown, not just because of the possibility of a skrull spy in their midst. However, if you are just trying the title out, you might be a little disappointed because this is an all-subplot issue as various little intrigues, mysteries and situations are set up, but not much real story to it, it's akin to watching a random episode of a soap opera.

Justice League of America: An ok issue. The pacing seems a little strange after the build-up of Amazo as a threat and he's taken out halfway through the comic so that we can move on to the resolution of Vixen's change in powers and ends with a cook-0ut with Buddy "Animal Man" Baker and family. The big shock, emotional cliffhanger of an ending? Vegetarian Buddy eating fried chicken without realizing it.

Secret Invasion: Thor: Matt Fraction does a very good job here, no decompressed storytelling. He sets up the human drama as Don Blake examines a pregnant woman who goes into labor when something strikes the nearby hidden Asgard. He wonderfully juxtaposes the tensions on Earth and Asgard: as the situation in Asgard worsens with news of imminent attacks by the Skrulls and the Asgardians prepare for war, we see the repercussions reflect in the terror of the pregnant woman wondering where her doctor is and people reacting to the storms that are designed to actually protect them from the terror of witnessing gods going to war. What happens on the epic scale is reflected by what's happening on the mundane and we have a Thor with duties to both. Luckily, we also have Beta Ray Bill. Braithwaite's sketchy art works well here in also capturing the real-world rural countrysides and the viking gods of Asgard. Indeed, it was his artwork that attracted me to trying out the title.

Captain Compass

A site I like to check out about once or twice a week is Toonopedia. A great site that is dedicated to comic books, comic strips and animation, scanning decades and media. I almost always learn something new. Today's Toonopedia entry is on Captain Compass:
http://www.toonopedia.com/capcomps.htm

I've read a few stories with him and found him to be an interesting detective character (of course, that partly could be because of my fondness for the seas). It was one of the reasons I got that Detective 500 that had a story with him and all the other back-up detectives over the years of Detective Comics' run, all wonderfully rendered by the master Jim Aparo. My first exposure to Captain Compass may have been in one of those little digests which reprinted a bunch of different individual detective stories with some of those same detectives. A quaint but enjoyable detective story where the clues to the mystery are in front of you.


However, what struck me about the Toonopedia entry was the panel of artwork that Don posted with it (He always posts an image, usually from the character's prime or original run). In this case, it is a panel from one of the stories. In terms of dynamics it's almost boring really; Captain Compass is simply pacing while musing in front of his chief in the office. On second look though, I was really struck by the amount of detail yet with an economy of line. Compass' head and shoulders are bowed in a defeated manner, his boss is watching with his head resting on the palm of his hand. The desk has panels, we see the blinds in the window, labels on the file cabinet as well as a shadow for depth. There's a model ship on the cabinet and a topographical map on the wall above it. The chair is completely rendered with the struts and Compass' clothes are realistically wrinkled, yet all with a sparsity of linework. Nothing fights for dominance, you have no trouble reading the scene, yet it's very detailed and very non-generic looking in that it does look like an office that someone head of a ship line might have thanks to little things like the model ship and map. It's the very type of scene that many of today's artists would fill up stray crosshatching lines, fancy angles (and today's writers would fill at least 3 panels, breaking up the dialogue and close-ups). And the colorist would fill it with gradients and photoshop effects. It is detailed, but it isn't busy or overly rendered or complex.

It's not the first time I've noticed things like this, a lot of times on some of the old art that is posted here or elsewhere. Taking the panel out of context (or in reprint books, sometimes the very fact the color printing is now in-register or bw so the bad printing is not a distraction), I see the artwork anew, not breezing through it to get to the next panel. And I'm struck just by how good it really is. Just how much detail that the artists manage to get in the scenes and still have it all be clearly legible. Often, less is indeed more.

Not saying I don't like detailed or busy art. John Byrne, if anything, puts more detail in his backgrounds now than he ever did. I love Perez and you cannot accuse him of skimping on details. However, what these two gentlemen do that many today seem not to is make it clear as to the story that each panel tells. Detail is fine as long as the purpose of the panel isn't lost in it, as long as the main idea that panel has to get across is loud and clear. You don't have to hunt in a Perez picture for the story it has to tell, if there are a hundred figures on the page, it's because it serves the scene. If it distracts you, it's not because you have to stop to figure out what the heck is going on, it's more because of what more former boss would call "The D**N factor". I.E. when you see it, you stop and go, "D**N!!" And you marvel at all that he managed to include in one scene.