Some thoughts on some recent comics (Avengers 3, SW: Capt. America 17, USAvengers 1, Flintstones 7)

[laughing_tree]

These aren't reviews.





Avengers #3, by Mark Waid and Mike Del Mundo. I don't know, my interest in this one is waning. It's not a bad book. It's a perfectly decent superhero story. But it reminds me of Alan Moore's old adage about the problem with superhero team books being that there's not much room for characterization when everyone's running around trying to save the world.

The first issue of this series, *before* all the running around started, was really good because it had the most characterization. Since then everyone's busy reacting to Kangs trying to kill them, and that's not the kind of stimulus that lends itself to a wide range of reactions, you know?







I'm always surprised by people complaining that this book lacks subtlety. While I expect a certain type of person to feel "subtle = superior," I wouldn't have expected that group to have much overlap with fans of freakin' superhero comics, a genre where guys named Captain America walk around dressed in flags and there are folks who call themselves Darkseid and Dr. Doom. Surely if anyone should understand that there is a place for completely foregoing subtlety in favor of the thunderously loud and blatant -- that there is value in that kind of art as well -- it's us. This book is gloriously, hilariously, wonderfully unsubtle.





U.S.Avengers #1, by Al Ewing and Paco Medina. Like the first issue of its predecessor series, NEW AVENGERS, this issue suffers a little from the fact that Ewing is so forthcoming in interviews. If you've read a bunch of those interviews like I have, you already know so much about this book that the first issue feels like a prolonged set-up and introduction for things you, well, already know.

But that's not a huge deal; Ewing's writing is filled with all its usual panache and -- more importantly, perhaps, given the series premise -- sincerity, and he and Paco Medina already seem more in sync than during their collaboration on CONTEST OF CHAMPIONS (or maybe it's just that Medina is now on a series that allows him more range). All of which makes for a blast of a reading experience.





The Flintstones #7, by Mark Russell and Rick Leonardi. Fill-in art by Rick Leonardi this issue. It's weird; I would have thought Leonardi would be a fine match for this book, given what I recall of his art, but I don't think it fits here well at all. Maybe it's the inking?

Comments

[tugrul]

Maybe characterization isn't what drives this book but the plot does. As superheroes conflicts go I thought the concept of future Priests of Pama that feed on time due to exposure to baby Kang's energies is an interesting one. Wasp made a heroic choice. Baby Kang just gets to you. I can't wait to see what's in store.

EDIT: Can anyone tell me where Wasp's dislike of Spider-Man comes from other than wasps and spiders being natural enemies?

[dcbanacek]

EDIT: Can anyone tell me where Wasp's dislike of Spider-Man comes from other than wasps and spiders being natural enemies?

Well, word around the watercooler is that Jan asked Pete if these tights made her butt looked big... and he said yes.

[philippos42]

This is the other Wasp, Nadia I think.

Or, if you like, "the Unstoppable Wasp." I think Jan was "the Wondrous Wasp."

[thanekos]

" Is everything a joke to you? "
" .. you know what my whole deal is, right? "
" Honestly, I'm not even sure we've met enough for me to. "
" You might be right about that. "

[nyadnar17]

"I'm always surprised by people complaining that this book lacks subtlety. While I expect a certain type of person to feel "subtle = superior," I wouldn't have expected that group to have much overlap with fans of freakin' superhero comics, a genre where guys named Captain America walk around dressed in flags and there are folks who call themselves Darkseid and Dr. Doom. ..."

But even with all that a lot comics are subtle about their political message. Having 5 attractive white people with super powers being stand in for racial and sexual minorities is crazy subtle. Steve Rogers has been wrapped in the flag since 1941 but no one really knows if he is a Republican or Democrat.

Immigration is a complex an emotional issue. Having the new Falcon be a super hero illegal immigrant fighting against genocidal border patrol kinda shits on half your potential audience. The story doesn't change anyone's mind, it doesn't raise awareness of an issue that wasn't getting much attention. Strawmen are as embarrassing for true believers as they are aggravating to opponents. The new Captain America book appears to be all super evil strawmen being fought by preachy true believers. It is just annoying and frustrating to read no matter which side of the issues you are on.

[thehood]

That's not true at all, Steve has always leaned more on the Liberal side, he's been a supporter of gay rights and Civil Rights for years.

He also punched Hitler quite literally before it was cool or acceptable. Back when his creators, both Jewish, got a lot of flack for criticizing the Nazi party.

And also remember that Steve Rogers was very opposed to Republican President Richard Nixon when he was in office.

Steve being liberal is also why they made USAgent more conservative in contrast.

And immigration isn't that complex. Racism has never been that complicated. And that's what it is, since people don't seem to care about the Canadian border.

But basically, you're wrong, comics have never been subtle about political messages. Like in the cover of Captain America's first book, they'll punch you in the face with it.

[cyberghostface]

"And immigration isn't that complex. Racism has never been that complicated. And that's what it is, since people don't seem to care about the Canadian border."

What are the statistics for undocumented immigrants coming in from Canada?

[thehood]

You honestly think only Mexicans can be illegal immigrants? Because that's not true at all.

The issue is that people only seem to complain about immigrants if they aren't white. They especially seem to focus on latinos exclusively.

[cyberghostface]

Where did you infer any of that?

[thehood]

The way you asked sorta implied you thought it never happens.

Sorry if that was not the case.

[cyberghostface]

I was asking if there was situation with illegal Canadian immigration period.

[stolisomancer]

Yep. Different problem, but still a problem.

http://www.latintimes.com/canadian-immigrants-lead-world-illegal-us-visa-overstays-according-first-ever-dhs-367906

[flint_marko]

Having 5 attractive white people with super powers

I assume you're referring to the X-Men?

[thehood]

There's a reason this tends to be the more memorable line up.

People didn't think five attractive white people with powers were an appropriate stand in for racial and sexual minorities.

[flint_marko]

The original team were outcasts, but I don't think Stan Lee actually meant for them to be a metaphor for minorities. That didn't really happen until Claremont took over.

[laughing_tree]

There was at least meant to be a metaphor for Jews, at least partly. There's shades of Protocols of the Elders of Zion stuff in some of the early anti-mutant stories.

[icon_uk]

Even then, it's a weird choice to, in 2017, make one of your three X-Books devoted to the most W.A.S.P. lineup of mutants EVER.

The closest thing to diversity they have is a homosexual character who had to have their gayness retconned in.

[flint_marko]

If you're talking about Cullen Bunn's new book with the O5, Magneto is going to be their mentor.

[tugrul]

White Anglo-Saxon Protestant, what?

[icon_uk]

Yes, the original five X-Men were all white, whip smart, straight, clean cut, middle/upper class kids with loving parents. (Aside from Scott of course on that last point, who was raised in (leaving Sinister retcons aside) a decent enough orphanage).

They made the Cunningham kids in Happy Days look like a street gang.

[philippos42]

Steve is canonically a New Deal Democrat, actually. But you're right that's it's played pretty low-key. Steve is a Democrat, Tony is probably a Republican, but it's not what the books are about.

That said. Captain America was a political comic to start with. It was advocating for the USA to get into the war against Germany before Germany had actually declared war on the USA. It was a sort of quasi-propaganda comic that US soldiers read during the war.

Today, the enemies of liberal society aren't a German army marching on Central Europe. They look more like internally developed right-wing parties: Putin's faction in Russia, Jobbik in Hungary, those guys in power in Poland, and so forth. What's a Captain America to do?

Well, look to his own country, I guess. And that will mean taking sides, or rather writing stuff that will be misconstrued as taking sides.

I don't agree with Nick Spencer on everything, but I don't blame him for trying to do Captain America comics that have some of that Captain America weirdness, instead of just being a generic super-hero. If you're going to make Sam "Captain America," it may as well mean something political, even if it loses some audience. Otherwise, why not leave him as the Falcon?

[thehood]

I don't know about lowkey, Steve has always been a supporter of Civil Rights.

[balbanes]

My biggest problem with the Avengers so far is the time traveling arc. They're already dead, so there are literally no stakes here-- you know everything will be undone via time nonsense in the denouement. Which isn't necessarily terrible: you can get in a lot of good characterization in stories where the plot doesn't matter. Except of course, there's no characterization either due to the panels being filled with pointless Kang fighting.

So basically, I'm struggling to care.

[gnarll]

It'd be more interesting if we could see some of the bereaved people go after the Kangs. Richard and Mary Parker were highly connected agents who just had their newborn shot in front of them by someone with futuristic weapons. They might have access to stuff like King Solomons Frogs or a Black Blade. Nadia was probably in the Soviet super-soldier program, that might mean Professor Phobos and The Presence.

And then there is Zeus.

Winning here might just buy Kang more trouble than he can handle.

[thehood]

Except the Kang never killed Hercules as a baby, so why would Zeus care?

More importantly, he'd blame it on Hera and move on.

And Nadia wasn't in a Super Soldier program, she was in science version of the Red Room.

[gnarll]

In Hercules, we've seen Hercules state that his father sired him for a purpose. He'd not take kindly to a garishly-dressed mortal interfering. Even if he found Hercules replaceable he'd be likely to take offense on principle. Even Doom went out of his way not to kill a son of Zeus for that reason.

While Nadia was in the Science academy, she would likely have crossed over with the SSS, as her father became a more and more well.known super hero.

[thehood]

It's moot either way, since the Kangs couldn't find Herc's point of birth either way.

[gnarll]

Yes, true. I just thought it would be a more interesting story if the Kangs did, and wiping out the Avengers brough far more trouble from the bereaved than it was worth.

Imagine Richard and Mary Parker empowered by Zeus to track down and gank Kang.

[balbanes]

After the first issue, I thought this was going to turn into a Hercules story. The master of time vs. a true immortal looked promising: a contrast between having visited various time periods and actually living them. Instead, we got time stream silliness and constant pointless fighting.

Oh well.

[cyberghostface]

The comment about subtlety in superhero comics vastly undersells what the genre is capable of.

There was a Spider-Man story a while ago that dealt with the ethics of assisted suicide. It's more than possible to tell stories that deal with controversial issues without falling into the level of broad caricature that Spencer is guilty of.

[thehood]

Apples and Oranges.

Also ignores that comics have never been subtle about political issues, especially concerning Civil Rights.

And again, this goes back to Captain America's first cover where he punched Hitler in the face in a point in time before America got involved in WW2 and it was not popular to do so.

[cyberghostface]

"Also ignores that comics have never been subtle about political issues, especially concerning Civil Rights."

There was recently a 50-issue series about a former superhero as mayor of New York that dealt with political issues and didn't descend into the level of caricature that Spencer does.

[thehood]

If you're talking about ExMachina, it wasn't that subtle.

[cyberghostface]

In comparison to Spencer, it was.

[laughing_tree]

I'm not saying they aren't capable of subtlety. I'm saying the fans should know that there's a strength and appeal to the proudly unsubtle, that it's not inherently inferior to subtlety, since that very appeal is at the heart of superheroes.

Calling a story unsubtle is like calling art 'cartooony' or coloring subdued. It's a descriptor, not a a valid criticism in itself.

[cyberghostface]

Then I'll try to use "hamfisted" and "condescending" to describe Spencer's attempts at political commentary in the future.

[laughing_tree]

If you only feel it's that way because it's not subtle, then it's still the same problem at root. If you feel it's that way for other reasons, then sure, have at it.