Conservative Comic Book Pundit

Wednesday, November 29, 2006

Red Menace #1 from Wildstorm Press

The guy behind the counter, knowing I am a fan of old school, JSA type comics, recommended this comic to me. It takes place during the McCarthy hearings and the Red Scare era.

The basic run-down in issue 1 is that a superhero agrees to cooperate with the McCarthy commission by revealing his identity, but he stops short of naming names. Of course, McCarthy paints the hero as a commie sympathizer because during WWII he fought beside a Russian hero (never mind that the Russians were our allies then).

There's nothing here, though. There is a subplot about a new, upcoming superhero but the story left me cold. The main hero is, of course, getting screwed over, but I have a hard time feeling any sympathy for him, as the characterizations in this tale are either non-existent or too standard.

I am, however, glad that someone has finally decided to speak truth to power about how evil McCarthy was. It's good someone really has the guts to take on such a controversial issue.

Tuesday, November 21, 2006

Civil War #5 and other thoughts.

Re: The ending of Civil War #5.

What a joke. Obvious, contrived and an attempt at gravitas that jumped straight past pathos into bathos. Rather than being appalled, I laughed out loud at Daredevil's idiotic attempt to allude to the New Testament.

Just when I thought Civil War couldn't get anymore obvious, Marvel decides to smack us upside the head with even more heady, pretentious moralizing.

Supergirl #11 was a joke. The writer (Joe Kelly) aims for art by following a stream of consciousness approach to time, what with the abandonment of linear storytelling. Too bad he doesn't have the skill to pull it off. Plus, this is the second Supergirl issue by Kelly to contain an incest joke. What's up with that?

52 chugs along at its slow, marketing gimmick pace.

Moon Knight continues to kick several shades of ass, though. I generally like Batman, but Batman wishes he was this cool.

Friday, November 10, 2006

What? Comic Reviews?

(New) Battlestar Galactica #3: Well, I've discovered that there aren't very many (percentage wise) people who are fans of both "New" and "Classic" Battlestar Galactica.

Dynamite is publishing comics in both universes, though their shipping schedules have been erratic so far. However, it seems they are intent on merging the two universes in small ways, making me wonder about the canonical status of these comics. The Classic BSG comic series deals with Starbuck returning to a colonial world and finding a resistance group there, paralleling a plot line in the new BSG. The third issue of this New BSG comic series ends with - well, go look at the last page, if there's still a copy at your local shop.

The first few issues of the New BSG have been rather odd and confusing. This third issue was better, and the story suddenly made a lot of sense (so much so, I went back and re-read the first few issues and they made a lot more sense in the light of this issue - perhaps this is a problem with the "paced for trade" storytelling in modern comics). So I now look forward to new issues in this series - although the artist has apparently never seen a woman smile, since all the women in this issue have odd, unnatural smiles.

However, the mixing of Classic and New BSG elements bugs and thrills me. On one level, I think: COOL!!!! But I wonder how well it will go over with the many fans who are only fans of one series or the other. Most people I know think the Classic series was horrid and love the New version, but there are those who have such fanatical loyalty for the older series they hate the new series on principle.

It will be an interesting ride.

Oh, and Dr. Strange: The Oath is the best comic (outside of Planet Hulk) that Marvel is currently publishing. Too bad it's so underhyped. Ignore the crappy, unnuanced politics of Civil War and enjoy a good, fun ride with the "Hoary @#@!$@ing Hosts of Hoggoth."

{As for the recent election - My verdict: Great for conservatives, but horrid for Republicans. The Democrats only won because they ran very conservative candidates in many districts, and the ballot referendums that passed were for the most part, conservative in nature. Basically, the Democrats won by becoming more conservative, and the Republicans lost because they had become more liberal. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.}