The Outhouse - The Greatest Comic Book Forum

[thefourthman]

I have already said, elsewhere, I will do a spoilerific review on Tuesday, not until then kiddies, not until then.

[Victorian Squid]

I have already said, elsewhere, I will do a spoilerific review on Tuesday, not until then kiddies, not until then.

Diva cup.

[Victorian Squid]

Plus is there a pigrace this week or not?

[thefourthman]

Plus is there a pigrace this week or not?

yes, I emailed Greg the list of possible books last night and await his response, I hope to post sometime this evening around 7...

[Punchy]

I'm just back from Holiday, so I haven't got my comics yet, I'll go get them tomorrow and review NA when I'm less jet-lagged.

[Amoebas]

Read this in store, it's Bendis so it never had a chance that I'd be buying it, but...

The art is SOOOOOO much better than what Romita did in the other book (except for Bens jaw - looks way weird).

Jessica wants Hand dead for pointing a gun at her & the kid, but says nothing when her husband shock wave nearly knocks them over.

Bendis is bad enough but even more Wolverine? gag!

All the talking with Hand flat out bored me.

And why would anyone form an Avengers team with only 1 flyer and just 2 capable of ranged attacks?

Art - 7
Story - 2
Overall - 4.5

EDIT: I forgot about those idiotic interviews at the end -

Story - 1
Overall - 4

[GLX]

For me, it was the end of RIP that killed the run for me.

I enjoyed the variation in style and tone in Batman. The Man-Bat arc was a mix of classic action and classic superhero melodrama. Loved it. It was the kind of story that defined '70s and '80s comics. The Club of Heroes arc was completely different and had this beautiful retro '60s feel to it. Then Batman RIP was like a wild David Lynch movie. I appreciated that Morrison was experimenting with different styles and giving us a number of different takes on what the Batman books could be.

But I hated the way RIP ended. I especially hated that it crossed over with Final Crisis, a book I had no intention of reading.

The stuff with The Lump was awesome.

[Eli Katz]

One of the most entertaining magic stories ever told is the Disney adaptation of T.H. White's classic, THE SWORD IN THE STONE. The climactic scene between Merlin and Madam Mim, where they engage in a wizards duel, is both suspenseful and amusing. The rules of the duel are simple: they must try to defeat each other by transforming into non-imaginary animals. Mim breaks the rules several times, most notably by turning herself into a dragon. Merlin, however, is able to defeat Mim anyway, by transforming into a germ and making her dragon deathly ill. What's great about this scene is that it imposes clear limits on the characters' magical abilities. The wizards can turn into animals, but can do little else. There are no super spells, no powerful zaps and blasts, no conjuring up invincible spirits. In short, no deus ex machina gimmicks are relied upon. Magic in this story is depicted as a tool rather than as an arbitrary power; the wizards must use their magic cleverly and strategically to succeed. They cannot simply use neat, new powerful spells to get themselves out of trouble.

I bring this up because Bendis has never imposed or followed any such rules when telling magic-based stories. I stopped reading the first volume of NEW AVENGERS, in part because the depiction of Dr. Strange and his powers made no sense. The good doctor could create awesomely complex illusions and transport the team willy-nilly around the world, but he could not stop a plane from crashing. Why? Who knows? Bendis never explained such gaps in the doctor's powers. He was too busy writing pointlessly long conversations between angry teammates to concentrate on the logic of the story itself.

From reading the opening issue of the rebooted NEW AVENGERS, it appears that Bendis will be telling yet another magic story without any logical consistency. This time Dr. Strange is quickly possessed by an unknown evil spirit and transformed into a bad guy. There's a bright mystical light show that accompanies this scene, but I'm not sure what the flashy lights do. I guess they make the book more visually exciting. Why is Dr. Strange so easily possessed? Who knows? Probably because Bendis thinks it's cool to make a good guy bad for a little while. It's an old Marvel cliche, heroes fighting heroes. But after CIVIL WAR and SECRET INVASION, I thought this new heroic age was going to avoid this formula for the foreseeable future. Silly me.

Bendis also gives Luke Cage mystical powers at the end of this first issue. Why? Who knows? Probably because Bendis thinks it'll be cool to see Marvel's biggest badass go all mystical for a story or two. But while this move may be fun and will undoubtedly provide a few eye-popping action scenes, it's unlikely to give the magical side of the Marvel Universe some much-needed definition. If powerful sorcerers are suddenly possessed and if street-level fighters are suddenly magical, then just about anything can happen in this book. For me, that kills the suspense before it even gets started. If the danger comes out of nowhere and if the plot twists come out of nowhere, then I figure the resolution will come out of nowhere, too. To paraphrase a fellow Outhouser, "It's magic, bitch; live with it."

Admittedly, it's still too early to dismiss the NEW AVENGERS completely. Bendis could still pen a story that's logically consistent. But I have this sinking feeling that he will be using magic here as he has before: as a device to complicate and resolve the plot at whim.

On a brighter note, Immonen does an awesome job on the art. He is able to fit a large cast of characters into every panel, without making scenes look crowded or awkward. He's an amazing illustrator, and I'm glad to see him on a major Marvel project. Too bad he's not on a more promising book.

STORY: 5
ART 8.5
OVERALL: 6.75

[Punchy]

I think it's unfair to criticise Bendis for not setting clear rules about Magic, no other writer in the MU has, so why pick on this case? If you have to blame someone, go all the way back to Stan!

I would also argue that what makes magic actually magical, is that it doesn't follow rules.

[thefourthman]

Bendis also gives Luke Cage mystical powers at the end of this first issue. Why? Who knows? Probably because Bendis thinks it'll be cool to see Marvel's biggest badass go all mystical for a story or two. But while this move may be fun and will undoubtedly provide a few eye-popping action scenes, it's unlikely to give the magical side of the Marvel Universe some much-needed definition. If powerful sorcerers are suddenly possessed and if street-level fighters are suddenly magical, then just about anything can happen in this book. For me, that kills the suspense before it even gets started. If the danger comes out of nowhere and if the plot twists come out of nowhere, then I figure the resolution will come out of nowhere, too. To paraphrase a fellow Outhouser, "It's magic, bitch; live with it."

This is exactly what I am talking about. Thank you Eli.

That's the same thing I am talking about with mansions that disappear until needed or only show up for cool moments. Or super powers that show up for no reason.

Bendis doesn't care about rules at any point. Having Maria call Bucky "Bucky-Cap" makes him giggle so he puts it in there even though it makes no sense as to how she has been portrayed for the past however long.

Same thing with Tony being rich or broke. He is what I want him to be and that's that.

It is shoddy storytelling, and to excuse it by it's always been there or that's the way it is or that's just bendis is demeaning to us as readers.

[BlueStreak]

I think it's unfair to criticise Bendis for not setting clear rules about Magic, no other writer in the MU has, so why pick on this case? If you have to blame someone, go all the way back to Stan!

I would also argue that what makes magic actually magical, is that it doesn't follow rules.

While there aren't "rules" on magic, there are basic guidelines.

There are tons of Dr. Strange stories that show how prepared he is for possessions, astral attacks, etc.

And this bullshit about how he's unprepared because he's no longer Sorcerer Supreme makes no sense too. Strange was prepared for this sort of shit for years.

Unless it's Agamotto or Cytorrak that's attacking, Bendis is just ignoring what's come before him so he can do whatever he wants.

[Eli Katz]

I think it's unfair to criticise Bendis for not setting clear rules about Magic, no other writer in the MU has, so why pick on this case? If you have to blame someone, go all the way back to Stan!

I would also argue that what makes magic actually magical, is that it doesn't follow rules.

I blame Bendis simply because he decided to tell a magic story. He didn't have to concentrate on this aspect of the Marvel Universe; he could have focused on something else.

You're right: Bendis is not alone in this. Marvel has never handled magic coherently. But a long history of bad storytelling doesn't justify the continuation of bad storytelling.

[Punchy]

While there aren't "rules" on magic, there are basic guidelines.

There are tons of Dr. Strange stories that show how prepared he is for possessions, astral attacks, etc.

And this bullshit about how he's unprepared because he's no longer Sorcerer Supreme makes no sense too. Strange was prepared for this sort of shit for years.

Unless it's Agamotto or Cytorrak that's attacking, Bendis is just ignoring what's come before him so he can do whatever he wants.

I think that it's a bad idea putting limits on magic, it removes that mysterious, unpredictable edge.

Don't over-explain things is my motto.

[Punchy]

I blame Bendis simply because he decided to tell a magic story. He didn't have to concentrate on this aspect of the Marvel Universe; he could have focused on something else.

You're right: Bendis is not alone in this. Marvel has never handled magic coherently. But a long history of bad storytelling doesn't justify the continuation of bad storytelling.

But it's not bad storytelling in the context of the Marvel Universe, where Magic is uncontrollable.

If say, Roy Thomas had established some rules back in the 70s and then Bendis contradicted them or ignored them, then fine, but in the Marvel U, they've always decided not to nail down what magic can do, in order to allow their writers more freedom.

[Eli Katz]

But it's not bad storytelling in the context of the Marvel Universe, where Magic is uncontrollable.

If say, Roy Thomas had established some rules back in the 70s and then Bendis contradicted them or ignored them, then fine, but in the Marvel U, they've always decided not to nail down what magic can do, in order to allow their writers more freedom.

Hey, I understand the appeal that it has, especially to writers who want quick explanations to justify new villains and plotlines.

But leaving magic undefined allows for a lot of bad storytelling. To use a non-Bendis example, One More Day.