Hey there MONDOcomics readers.
If you read the internet like I do you might have already looked down and realized that this isn’t your typical MONDOcomics. You might have feelings of panic, anxiety and disorientation — those are natural. They will pass as you come to love our new, permanent-for-now format. After 81 weeks of snapshot reviews, it was time for a change. Personally, I was getting burnt out trying to be uniquely witty on four to seven different titles every week. Also, sometimes there’s only so much you can say about your favourite guilty pleasures. So, we’ve decided to open it up and change the format drastically. Now, it’s up to each writer what they want to write about that week. That means you might get a long dissertation from Isaac one week or a series of short hit-pieces from me or a couple of picks of the week from Owen. The idea is to write about what we want to write about. Expect experimentation, new formats and love-ins. Hope you enjoy.
Amazing Spider-Man #649
Dan Slott (w), Humberto Ramos (p), Carlos Cuevas (i), Edgar Delgado (c). Marvel Comics.
While I’m still concerned about how quickly everything has been handed over to Peter Parker for this storyline (a high paying science job when he most needed it), this problem is somewhat mitigated by the fact that they’ve added a very intriguing wrinkle — the return of Phil Urich. Beyond it being a nice nod to history, I didn’t think much of Phil’s appearance last issue, but now I realise he was in the exact same position as Parker, aimless and just scraping by. In this issue his fortunes change, arguably just as fantastically as Peter’s, but along the criminal alignment. I mean, Phil even has an Uncle Ben of his own! Phil’s story has always been told in relation to Spider-Man’s — now they’re taking that story and making Phil a dark version of Peter. Naturally there’ll be a fair amount of people who’ll cry foul at this; if they were a big fan of Phil as the heroic Goblin either in the past or not-too-distant, “what if” future of the Spider-Girl series, or they may have a problem with him just having a sonic scream when before it was a hardware ability in his mask. Maybe that’d only bother me. Regardless, I can understand not liking this characterization, but I’m still really impressed by this move from a thematic stand point. S’alright? S’alright. — Isaac Mills
Batman and Robin #17
Paul Cornell (w), Scott McDaniel (p), Rob Hunter (i), Alex Sinclair (c). DC Comics.
It’s for single issues like this that I was always (and in fact, still am) reluctant to add titles to my weekly pull list. Yes, I may be a devoted follower of comic “X”, but maybe six months go by and a creative team is introduced that you just don’t like. Fair enough — it’s a little awkward — but I can ask the comic guys to drop that title from my pull list. How about when it’s just an issue or two, a quick filler arc that you don’t want? It shouldn’t be a big deal to get a temporary hold on collecting a book — and yet it always is. My sympathies are with Paul Cornell. For whatever reason, he’s had to create a filler comic while we wait for the previously advertised Peter J. Tomasi arc, and yes, it’s the first story after the much loved (by me anyways) Grant Morrison run. Cornell’s story idea itself is good, but suffers from an attempt at mimicking Morrison’s style — chiefly, the story structure being told out of order, the use of an obscure character (Una Nemo, though seeing as I’ve never heard of her it’s likely she was created with a mind to SOUNDING like an obscure character), and making a villain that leaves clues in the same way as a silver age Riddler or Joker. These are tough things to make work, even without a time crunch, or, I suspect, an editorial mandate to keep this book sounding like Batman and Robin. The cover art by Guillem March is fantastic (channelling Frank Quitely a little bit, I dare say) but when I opened up to find Scott McDaniel on the interior artwork I gave a little cry of “no!” McDaniel has become DC’s go to guy for filler material, and his use as such is a disservice to me as a consumer, and to himself as an artist — I’ve seen him do good work! Give him more than an hours notice to draw a book. — Isaac Mills
Justice League: Generation Lost #14
Judd Winick (w), Aaron Lopresti (p), Matt Ryan (i), Hi-Fi (c), DC Comics.
Justice League: Generation Lost sort of caught everyone off-guard. It was less-trumpeted than DC’s other bimonthly title, Brightest Day, but has developed quite the following. In my opinion it’s easy to see why. This comic is fun, well-paced and features an amazing blend of nostalgia and new directions for the cast.
Ah, the cast… I love the Justice League International years. They were hilarious and a blast to read, all without sacrificing great action. It’s fantastic to see these characters reunited (minus one or two and with a couple of great additions). Booster Gold aside, these guys have been stuck in limbo lately, with only the occasional crowd scene pulling them out. It’s great to see them get their due again. Winick is doing a fantastic job of writing them. He seems to get them and their dynamic, building on what was there before rather than just reliving their glory years. Booster’s development over the last few years has been noticed, and he’s serving as a leader of sorts to the group. Heck, even Captain Atom (my least favourite) has grown on me!
This issue is a Captain Atom issue. We’ve had one before, similar to this one, where he is sent through time. Last time it was the best issue I’d read up to that point, this time… well… it’s giving last issue a run for its money. Watching Captain Atom explore the alternate future portrayed here is immensely satisfying. One of the main reasons for that is that DC is portraying a dystopian future that ISN’T Kingdom Come. For the last few years DC has been leaning extremely heavily on Kingdom Come. There have been constant references to it, characters from it and hints that it might come true. That’s cool and all, but at a certain point I just start to think: “we get it, it’s awesome and popular. Move on, please.” That’s what was so much fun about this issue: I got to see things I hadn’t seen before! New versions of characters I love! A new mystery about what caused this world!
Which leads me to Lopresti’s artwork, and it is awesome. The new characters designs on the future’s Justice League are tons of fun, with hints as to what might have happened in their past. I especially loved the OMACs here, which were incredibly cool. Overall, this entire series has been both a love letter to the JLI days, but also a push to move them into the modern DC era. It’s great to see the characters used so well, reminding me why I liked them in the first place and even helping me to warm to some I was never that fond of before (Captain Atom). I hope that this series is successful enough that we’ll see some sort of follow-up when it ends with issue 24. And you know what? I’d love it if Winick were to write it. — Owen Craig
Thor: The Mighty Avenger #6
Roger Langridge (w), Chris Samnee (a), Matt Wilson (c). Marvel Comics.
I got really upset when I read that this comic was going to be cancelled after issue eight. Mostly, I’m sad because this is a really great comic and it’s sad when quality product goes to the place that so much quality product goes — no where. The other reason I was upset: reading comic book message boards.
I have a problem where I read the opinion of the people who write on message boards. The problem is that I know they’re going to enrage me but I do it anyway. Here was what pissed me off — people blaming this on Joe Quesada.
First, he works in editorial. When a book is cancelled due to low sales it’s not editorial’s call. It’s sales call, it’s the publisher’s call. Ultimately, it’s Dan Buckley’s call. So, if you want to put a name to your rage direct it to him. Despite what you might think, Quesada is not a moustache twirling villain. He doesn’t want to cancel this book. Michale Horwitz, Nathan Cosby and Sana Amanat (the editors) don’t want to cancel this book. They worked hard on it. They wanted to see this book succeed. You think you’re disappointed? Try being them.
Second, Marvel probably lost money on this book. They’re a big company and have a lot of overhead. How much do you think Marvel got in revenue on this book? Maybe $12,000? That’s generous. There are 10 people listed in the credits of this book, which is not a lot of money to divide between them. And that doesn’t even take into account the cost of Marvel’s marketing staff, or their maintenance staff, or the cost to print the bloody thing. So you hear anyone blaming Marvel for not supporting this book, ask them how much money they want Marvel to loose on it.
This is our fault. This is the fault of a stupid fan system that rewards pandering to the ugliest sides of consumerism. It’s our fault that this book is going to die.
But here’s where we can redeem ourselves, nerds. We can save this comic. It’s worked in the past. Buy this comic. Tell your friends to buy this comic. You know what would make a great gift for a reader over the age of 8? This comic. Buy it. Buy it a lot. It’s the kind of comic you can give to a “non comic reader” and they would love it. You can’t say that about most of the comics I buy. And that’s a better way. That’s a better type of comic. We should support that kind of comic. It will make you a better person. — Miles Baker
Yeah, Quesada doesn’t even have a mustache!
Thanks for that perspective Miles- where’d you get that $12 000 number? Not that I don’t trust you, but I can’t rely on you to tell me this forever.
I keep hearing how good Justice League: Generation Lost is- maybe this is the legitimate Justice League book I’ve been looking for… ’cause it sure ain’t Justice League. Or the Sturges Justice Society kids thing.
But I haven’t checked out JSA as done by Guggenhiem.. that’s actually got more than promise.
I definitely recommend Generation Lost. It’s got all of the epicness that a Justice League story should have. Plus it’s starring the JLI, the greatest line-up the Justice League ever had!
Hey Isaac, I’m basing it on approximately 12,000 copies sold at 3 bucks for the retail price. Retailers are going to buy that for about $1.50, and then Diamond is going to take their cut, probably around .50 a book. So that leaves a — approximately — buck for the publisher to take home.
That’s pretty logical captain. Thanks
I’m going to offer a reason for Thor being canceled. Keep in mind I’ve only read one issue of the book (the one you reviewed) so I’m not going to comment on the quality of the storytelling – it might be awesome, it’s hard to tell from one out of context episode.
But maybe interest in this title comes from Thor not really being Thor. He kind of acts like a petulant teenager in the issue above, and it doesn’t help that Samnee’s cartoony style makes him look like a reject from a Teen Titans TV episode. He looks like a kid playing dress up with a hammer, not the intimidating Norse God of Thunder that we’re used to.
Now that’s not inherently bad. I think different takes on characters are worth exploring. But if you’re going to do so, why dress him up EXACTLY like he appears in concurrently running comics? Why do this new take on a character, alter his attitude, his history, and even the background of his supporting characters (eg Jane Foster is a museum curator) but still tie him to the characterization we’re used to with that old costume? Just do a totally new Thor if that’s what you want to do. Give him red hair, like he has in mythology. Otherwise it’s just confusing. I had no freaking clue what was happening in #6, I couldn’t figure out if it was in continuity or why Thor was drawn like a heavy metal version of one of the Archies.
It’s like, they want you to hop on board this title because you’re a Thor fan and hey, it’s Thor, but it’s not really Thor as I know him so why should I care? I’d much rather come across a totally/mostly unrelated to the Marvel U Thor and enjoy that series based on its writing and art than be fooled by a misleading ‘hook’. Like Michael Avon Oeming’s Hammer of The Gods mini, for example.
Imagine if a comic came out called Spider Man: The Amazing Avenger and Peter Parker went around being completely silent, crippling people like a slightly less murderous Punisher and he was drawn by David Finch, but his costume was still the exact same. And you picked up issue #4 with Spidey on the cover and took a look inside. Might be a great comic, but it’s not really the Spider Man I want to see.
Keep in mind, I’m not bad mouthing the comic. I’m just saying, as someone who knows about Thor, I picked up a copy of the latest issue and thought, “What the hell is this? Is this a comic for younger readers? Is it a romance comic?” and didn’t want anything to do with it. That’s probably why it was canceled.
Caesar, I get what you’re saying but that’s the exact attitude that I think is ruining the entire comics industry.
For a comic to sell in today’s environment it has to be connected to a mega-event and and at least four other titles. Fuck whatever people say about wanting about quality, contained stories with no crossovers — they don’t reward that with dollars. Mainstream comic book readers are afraid of anything new or slightly different, it’s depressing.
Yeah, this character is a new take on Thor, it’s never going to connect to a larger story or “matter” to the Marvel universe — but it’s better than Thor has ever been, so fucking buy it.
But why bother making it a new take on Thor at all? Just change a few names and you’ve got a much less confusing story. Maybe if I knew ahead of time what it was I was looking at it would be more appealing – but when you change a LOT of stuff whilst doing a new take on a character, you have to ask the question, how much can you change before it doesn’t make sense to claim it’s the same character?
Honestly, I was a little annoyed when I read that issue, because I felt that Thor was SO different from the Thor I know that they just used his name and costume as a gimmick to get me to buy the comic instead of relying on their own talents as writers and artists. Though maybe that’s a necessary evil for the majority of comic readers.
This seems like an ‘Ultimate Thor’ kind of thing, except without any promotion or warning. I didn’t know this title existed until issue 3 came out, and didn’t know it was non-canon Thor until #6. At that point I’m not going to go back and search out the five issues previous, especially when the comic was so discombobulating.
I DO get what you’re saying, and I agree that most comic readers are too frightened of anything non-mainstream. It’s a tough industry.
I… agree with Caesar?
The point about Jane Foster being a museum curator rings true, if there isn’t a character from either Thor’s canon or the Marvel universe at large that can be used as a museum curator, why not just make this curator someone else, a Jane Smith?
uh, of course I apologize if Jane Foster WAS a curator at one point.
It’s just that if they go out of their way to include ‘curator character-Jane Foster’ they do that in order to capitalize on her being an existing character, it’s a wink to the fans/those in the know… which are then the very same people who get turned off by it being a different character. They’ve shot themselves in the foot on this point, is what I’m saying.
WHOA, ISAAC. Whoa. Your agreeing with me just blew my mind a little. Amazing. I feel like something terribly unnatural has happened, like if a man somewhere just gave birth.
Thanks though!
You guys understand that your points are proving me right, right? Like, you guys are the problem I’m talking about. You’re saying that this comic deserved failed because it wasn’t tied into 60 years stupid, mind-numbing continuity regardless of its quality? That’s BULLSHIT.
This comic deserved to fail because of the names of the characters? That’s BULLSHIT.
Why “bother”? Name a Thor story that you’d hand a 10-year-old after he or she goes to see Thor on the big screen next summer. I know what one I’d hand them — this wonderful, continuity-light, super fun version with a strong female lead.
The first issue, but it makes it abundantly clear that this is a fresh and interesting take on the character. He’s a younger and has things to learn, unlike the boring god that walks around the Marvel U.
No, no, no. I’m not saying it deserved to fail. I’m saying one of the possible reasons it failed is because it confusingly appears to tie into continuity, but doesn’t. One or the other would have been a safer bet.
It’s just perspective and personal preference dude. In that, I perceive this series as pretending that it doesn’t tie into continuity, but this annoys me because it still half-ties into the Marvel Thor character by presenting a bunch of recognizable items in the story, like Jane Foster (but she’s a curator now so she’s so fresh and different!) and Thor’s modern costume.
I prefer not to read a story that 10 year olds would like, and I think that’s a perfectly fair and reasonable thing to say…in fact, I can’t believe you even brought that up as a selling point because most 10 year olds are idiots (comedic hyperbole). And I prefer NOT to read a story that half-asses it, or perhaps more kindly, tries to have its cake and eat it too. And I prefer NOT to read a story about a character I like who is nothing like the character I like except the way he dresses.
I don’t want ‘my’ Thor to be a romantic teen movie lead and look like he belongs in Riverdale trying to decide between Betty and Veronica, any more than I want to see ‘my’ Wolverine become an interior fashion designer and worry about his haircut. Choose a different Thor for that and maybe I’ll be interested.
And I didn’t come into it on issue 1, maybe it would be different if I did. This comic is not accessible to people who come into it after issue one because it LOOKS like regular Thor, but isn’t, and that’s confusing to the reader.
Furthermore, I don’t think calling me and Isaac “problems”, or if I’m extrapolating this correctly, “the problem with comic readers today,” because we don’t love your favourite comic right now is fair or accurate. Not speaking for Isaac, but again, I don’t hate the comic, and I trust you when you say it’s a good quality book – really, I do, you’re a smart guy. It’s just not my cup of tea and that has nothing to do with how new and fresh it is.
And you seem really angry about this. Don’t be – I’m merely trying to offer another explanation why this comic didn’t sell, gleaned from a perspective you might not have considered because our opinions are, as is horribly obvious, very, very different.
Yeah, I’d probably have liked the comic alright, if I was into buying Thor, and or wanted more of a kids book. Seeing as neither is the case, it shouldn’t be surprising when I don’t go buy it.
Using Foster is, exactly, a case of having your cake and eating it too. Which I’m given to understand doesn’t work.
The real reason this book doesn’t work, if in fact that is the case, is that comics these days CAN’T be supported as single issue experimental series… when I was a kid I bought my books at a Shoppers Drug Mart in a small town. I used a toonie that my dad gave me, and still got change back. Though I don’t remember it, probably because it happened during the sweetest dream possible, my first issue of Superboy presumably came from that store, with a similar toonie, as an experiment. When your comics go for $1.25 ($1.75 CAN) it’s easier to give it a try- but going back further we all know it was less… now I know things just get more expensive over time, but the fact that gets me is I DON’T SEE COMICS AT THE SHOPPERS ANYMORE. Why is the comics audience shrinking? Because you have to actively go out and find these books now- and a new audience isn’t going to go out and find something they don’t know that they’re missing.
Not only that, but the 6 issues of this Thor that HAVE been released, I’m going to guess they went for $3 a pop, right? So will that equal an $18 trade? Er, this is just going on my gut (and so my being wrong will be quite an indictable offence) but I bet it’ll be sold in trade format at about $14, maybe less.
The books are being written for trade, priced to move as a trade, but the continuation of the series will be determined by how well it sells in a single issue format? That no one can find? That the single issue comics buyers that currently exist aren’t interested in?
That’s ridiculous. If they AREN’T going to make these single issues accessible to their target market (at, say, the supermarket), then could they please just be honest with themselves, and sell a trade from the get-go. Let THOSE sales speak for whether or not this series should continue.
Keep in mind this is from someone who loves single issue format, again, going back to my earliest nostalgic comic days- I loved how each issue had a full story to itself, it explained all the players, and I could piece together most of the CLONE SAGA from narration I was reading in only Amazing and SOME Spectacular Spider-Man (I didn’t read from any of the other Spidey books, Peter Parker: Spider-Man or Sensational Spider-Man, for YEARS- that’s at least half the Spider comics I was missing out on).
That right there is actually one of the benefits of having a single line of canonical stories- as you pick stuff up, you learn the history and feel like you’re being let in on the secret. I know that having an immense backstory can be a detriment to getting in to a new series- that’s actually why I’m so hesitant to get into Dr. Who and Battlestar Galactica- but really, just because those series fail at making each installment fun and accessible (I’m looking at YOU Lost), doesn’t mean continuity is a bad thing at all.
Okay, I better post this before something happens and I lose it all. Hope the spellings right, we’ll see.
I, when I was really young, like single-digits age, used to go to a used book store for my comics. There was always a random assortment of beat up comics for purchase, and I’d go in there and buy like, 10 comics for three bucks. Lots of Casper and Richie Rich and Hot Stuff, and then whatever superhero books I could get my hands on…I put together a fairly good Firestorm run at one point, but it was mostly one issue of Green Lantern here, an issue of Superman there, and so on. It sucked for getting complete runs of stories, but it really got me into comics. Affordability and accessibility are really important for getting new fans.
YES exactly!
I’m with Miles, dudes. I always hated the notion that if your “new take on the character” is “too new” then it shouldn’t be named the same thing. You’re naming it that because…
a) by showing off a new side of characters then it adds another layer to the existing rich character. Imagine if Batman had never been reimagined. Imagine if he was still the Adam West version? Or the Dick Sprang version? Or the version that carried a gun? Part of what makes Batman so enduring is that he has been reinvented so many times. I’m not going to avoid one because it’s not the “real” Batman if its a good story.
b) accessability. I totally disagree with you here. I’m with Miles. Avoiding a book because it’s different from the mainstream universe is your choice, but we need books like this. My fiancee has ZERO interest in the main Thor book, but issues of this couldn’t come out fast enough for her. She loved it.
And, I’m sorry guys, but Jane Foster as a museum curator is a problem? I’m going to drop my reasonable debate facade and go to annoyed internet commenter styles: WHO CARES????? Make up a new character? Why? Because she has a different job? This isn’t the main book, it’s a different one. One that non-comic-readers were enjoying. They could make Captain America his brother for all I care as long as the book is good. Which it was. It was awesome.
No, neither Caesar nor myself really care about Jane Foster being a museum curator, because ultimately we have no great interest in the book in general- we’re just sitting here, looking at each other with this quizzical expression on our faces, and are asking an academic question: how does this active decision help this Thor book?
And we’re both like “I… don’t think it does.”
It sounds like ol’ Owen and Miles are saying that this shouldn’t be a factor. But saying it shouldn’t be a factor, and it not being a factor are two very different things.
To address your ‘a’ point Owen- all those different takes on Batman, the original gun toting vigilante, morphs into the law abiding Batman of the squeamish 50’s and 60’s, which gets the camp satirical treatment from the Adam West Batman, then getting the revitalizing dark knight returns treatment… these are all variations on a theme, but even for some of the biggest changes (like say, getting rid of Batman using a gun and killing) that was done as a marketing decision to make Batman more palatable to his audience. Whether it worked or not, whether or not it was necessary, that is of course up for debate, but regardless there were reasons behind this change. And all the while, the basics remain constant: “orphaned billionaire grows up to be powerless but awesome super hero”
To adapt the Jane Foster change to Batman would I think sound more like “penniless drifter bitten by radioactive bat becomes spelunker”
which is fine so long as there’s a reason for that, either in asking what does this new take on the character say about the character we all know and love (i.e. any of a variety of Batman Elseworlds tales) or, maybe you just want to tell a story about this penniless drifter, and it has nothing to do with Batman at all. That would be more likely something not published by DC, but still possibly a fantastic story. In fact more and more I’m liking the sound of this radioactive bat spelunker…
To be clear then: If they make changes to the Thor mythos for the purposes of telling a better story, or to attempt to make it more palatable to the target audience, more power to them. But if there isn’t a reason then it blows my mind.
And as far as ‘b’ goes- I want fun stories that are suitable for kids/fiancees to exist. They need as much support as possible to exist because (and this was my point earlier) I don’t believe the physical distribution strategy of comics as it stands now is equal to the task of getting these books to the attention of their target audience- I think you’ll admit that Anya having you is a bit of an unfair advantage when it comes to finding comics she’ll like- and without changes to that physical distribution strategy all the comic guys have to work with is their story! AND pleasing those of us that go buying comics!
Which is a pretty tough barrier, obviously.
They should condense it to a fun digest size and give Archie a run for his money at the grocery store. Why do Archie Comics get a monopoly there? Are THEY the secret rulers of the world? Because if they are, then my conspiracy theories have been WAY off base.
Meh. I’m not going to reiterate all the reasons I feel the way I do, but I will say that I don’t think my viewpoint is any less valid than yours. If you’re fine with reading a story about a character you like who resembles a mainstream character in no way whatsoever except for his haircut (or whatever), then that’s cool. I’m not. And I will reiterate that I think these opinions all stem from the perspective we take on the subject, and neither perspective is incorrect.
Regarding Batman though, that’s a good point, but there’s a time, place, and a direction for each character to evolve in, and if those circumstances converge properly, then readers will accept the ‘new’ version of the character eventually. But that’s not what’s going on with Thor. It’s not an evolution of the character, it’s a different take on him entirely.
As for your second reason, accessibility, I don’t know if I agree with that, or maybe it’s just the wording. It’s perfectly accessible to new readers or even people who get in on the ground floor. But I think ‘recognition’ is a more likely reason to name a new version of a character the same as the old version. You want to attract existing fans, otherwise how will it sell? If these guys had named this comic “Jerry, The Mighty Revenger” it wouldn’t have gotten most of the business it did. So they named it Thor because we all know Thor and well, it IS Thor (more or less). But you can’t do that without taking the risk that you will confuse/annoy readers who are turned off by this particular take on Thor (like me).
Some love it, some don’t, it’s as simple as that — but I take offense that I’m what’s wrong with comic readers or that my opinion is bullshit because I don’t like the version of Thor that’s presented to me.
For what it’s worth, I’m sorry your comic got canceled.
Well, I think we’re back to where you guys and Miles left it. Different strokes and all that.
I agree that it’s tough for a book that doesn’t “count” to survive in the current comics climate and realistically it’s not worth it. Books with different takes on the characters have done okay before (Superman: Red Son, Dark Knight Returns, Age of Apocalypse). Still, those have the grim and gritty thing going for them. I guess the closest thing we’ve had to this before is Spider-Man Loves Mary Jane. And that barely made it to 25 or so issues.
I maintain that the comics community needs to learn how to make their non-violent, non-continuity books last if we’re every going to sell outside of our current audience, because that audience is shrinking fast.
Yeah, it IS tough, but what is there to do? Current readers generally like their continuity, and new readers probably aren’t made aware that there’s stuff like this Thor comic out there that they would like.
How DOES one attract new readers to comic books? You think the industry would be doing better, with all these comic book movies in theaters, theoretically stirring up interest in the medium. Someone should write an article about it.
I wonder if the answer isn’t shorter, self-contained stories – Red Son and those other titles were never intended for extended runs. Maybe putting out limited series (but not calling them that) is a better way to go.
Isaac, I somehow missed your last comment in all this, and I wanted to single this out: “penniless drifter bitten by radioactive bat becomes spelunker”.
BAH HA HA HA HAA! Amazing!!
Maybe the digital market can help? We can only hope.