|
|
Reviews and commentary by Tony Isabella
"America's Most Beloved Comic-Book Writer & Columnist"
Current TOT >>
TOT Archives |
About Tony |
Message Board
TONY'S ONLINE TIPS
for Monday, June 23, 2008
From Comics Buyer's Guide #1643 [July, 2008], which was published in mid-May:
"I have lived in the shadow of this my whole life. I am so happy now, I just can't explain it."
- Laura Larson, daughter of Jerry and Joanne Siegel
The biggest news in comicdom is that a federal judge has ruled the heirs of Jerry Siegel, the co-creator of Superman, are entitled to a share of the U.S. copyrights to the Man of Steel. As of this writing, the judge has further ruled that the parties - the Siegels and Time-Warner - must spend the next two months trying to work out a settlement and that, if no settlement can be reached, the trial to determine the amount and nature of the Siegels' share will begin in November. I make no claim to legal expertise, but this appears to be a major and well-deserved victory for the Siegels and perhaps for other comics creators as well.
Others far more detail-oriented and qualified will be writing about this case, probably in the very magazine you are holding in your hands. My self-appointed task is to look at this case from a different angle and it starts with this:
I'm ashamed of you.
Not all of you, mind you, just the churlish, largely anonymous online "fans" who reacted to the news of the Siegels' victory with disgusting invective directed at Jerry's wife and daughter and sans even the merest scintilla of understanding of the copyright laws of the United States of America. These self-styled defenders of Time-Warner, which has spent nearly a decade trying to deny the Siegels what is rightfully theirs by law, condemn the Siegels as greedy, as unworthy of sharing in the enormous profits DC and Time-Warner have made from Superman, as unconcerned about the legacy of the Man of Steel. After all, what could be more important than preserving the continuity of this year's DC Universe?
Any comics creator who has been screwed over by a publisher knows their pain was pain shared by their families. My problems in this regard pale in comparison to what Jerry Siegel and his family had to go through, to what Jack Kirby and his loved ones had to go through, to what Bill Finger, who never received the recognition or rewards due him for his co-creation of Batman and nearly every key element of Batman, had to go through. Yet, even on my relatively minor scale, I know what I suffered and I know how my Sainted Wife Barbara and our kids have suffered along with me...and I know that Joanne Siegel, that superwoman of devotion to her family, suffered far worse for nearly her entire married life with Jerry. How dare those cruel and clueless fans tell her and her family they are not worthy to share in the fortunes that have flowed from Jerry's and Joe Shuster's creativity!
God bless you, Joanne and Laura, and congratulations on your victory. I pray you will, at long last, receive the benefits from Superman's creation Jerry always wanted for you.
I am thrilled for Joanne and Laura. I think all Superman fans and all comicdom, fan and professional alike, should be thrilled as well. And shame on those of you who are not.
One more note on this subject.
Can we put an end to the patent nonsense that DC Comics took any huge risk publishing Superman? They paid no more for it than they did for any other feature in Action Comics #1 and they expected no more of it than they did of any other feature. They took no risk beyond the risk they would have taken had any other feature appeared in the lead spot. Indeed, given that the company already had a couple successful titles, even publishing this new title wasn't all that much of a risk.
It wasn't until Superman proved to be a smash that DC started putting him on every cover of Action. Nor did they take any great risk giving him his own book. Superman #1 was entirely reprint. I wonder if Siegel and Shuster received payment for the reprinting of their stories from the first four issues of Action Comics.
DC didn't take any real risks licensing Superman for radio, cartoons, serials, and merchandising. That was all money that came to them freely and easily as a direct result of the creativity of Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster. Portraying the DC Comics management of that era as heroic risk-takers is absurd. They were businessmen who reacted to the success of the character and profited from that success far more than the character's creators. They've continued to profit from that success. Good for them.
Now it's time for DC Comics and other publishers to share the wealth and deal more fairly with the comics creators of the past, the present, and the future.
Edited by noted Batman writer/editor Dennis O'Neil with Leah Wilson, Batman Unauthorized [Benbella; $17.95] presents 18 articles and essays on the Dark Knight. As with most anthologies, fiction or non-fiction, the reader should expect that some pieces will suit him or her more than do others.
In this anthology, I had little regard or use for the essays that tried too hard to be ponderously academic or snidely clever. Geoff Klock's absurd apologies/rationalizations for a host of Frank Miller-penned excesses. Alex Bledsoe's sad attempt at risque humor involving Robin and puberty. David Seidman's dreary explanation of why he believes Batman is a failure.
The editing had problems of its own. Michael Marino's look at Ra's al Ghul is awash in trivial, unnecessary footnotes. John C. Wright's comparison of Batman and Superman includes misinformation about the Phantom, the costumed hero and Batman predecessor created by Lee Falk, misinformation any comics-versed editor or proofreader should have caught.
Additionally, when Alan J. Porter tries to make the case that it doesn't matter who did what in Batman's early days, it does not sit well with this writer. Bill Finger might have taken much from the pulp magazines of the day, but he also took Bob Kane's "Bird-Man" and turned the character into one of the greatest characters in the history of comics.
Yet there are certainly some gems in this book. Robert Brian Taylor takes the comics and the movies to task for epically stupid developments. Darren Hudson Hick's scrutiny of what it costs to be the Batman is wonderful fun, as is Mike W. Barr's "Batman in Outer Space," covering Batman's more fantastic adventures.
I enjoyed Lou Anders' speculations on the Joker and how that villain will be treated in the new movie. Kudos are also due Paul Lytle for his thoughts on Arkham Asylum, to Mary Borsellino for her piece on the parents of Bruce Wayne, to Robin S. Rosenburg for her insightful exploration of Batman's sanity or lack thereof, and to Kristine Kathryn Rusch for "Batman in the Real World."
Half of Batman Unauthorized is terrific and only a few of its articles fall to the level of "awful." That's not too bad for an anthology, so I'm awarding this book a perfectly respectable three out of five Tonys.
New from Del Rey is Hiro Mashima's Fairy Tail [$10.95]. Mashima is best known as the creator of Rave Master, which I could never get into, but the first two volumes of his new series had me darn near giggling with delight.
Girl wizard Lucy wants to join Fairy Tail, a guild noted for its rebellious nature and wild attitude towards magic. Fairy Tail makes the ruling wizards council despair and evil-doers tremble as it racks up collateral damage rivaling that of the X-Men in their glory days. Before the end of the first book, she's met and teamed up with Natsu, a fire-wizard prone to motion sickness, and Happy, a talking cat who can grow temporary wings.
As members of Fairy Tail, the trio picks its missions from a job-board at their guild's tavern. Their adventures are serious - searching for a missing wizard, seizing a one-of-a-kind book from an evil lord, and trying to keep a death cult from using a magical object that can kill all within its range - but filled with humor. I love these characters.
Mashima is to be commended for some of the best storytelling I've seen in manga. Though the background of this series is fairly complicated with its multiple wizard guilds and powers, every tale flows smoothly with readers getting all the information they need to keep up with the action. Kudos are also due translator/adapter William Flanagan for his role in this series.
Del Rey thought so highly of this series that it released the first two volumes simultaneously. Their confidence is justified. Fairy Tail earns the full five Tonys.
2000 AD Extreme Edition [Rebellion; $5.99] mines the achieves of "the galaxy's greatest comic" to bring readers one of the best buys in comics. Each issue presents 116 pages of black-and-white - and sometimes color - material from the Brit magazine that launched so many comics careers and which still delivers "thrill-power" each and every week. Issue #24 [October 2, 2007] was a particularly fun collection of stories starring the Ro-Busters, broken down robots, some of them veterans of Earth's wars, who clean up after the disasters of tomorrow. The lead characters are Hammer-Stein, sort of the Sgt. Rock of soldier robots, and Ro-Jaws, a sarcastic sewer-cleaning robot.
The issue begins with stories flashing back to Hammer-Stein's military career. Written by Pat Mills and drawn by Kevin O'Neil, the first of these tales could have come out of the pages of DC's war comics of the 1960s. The only survivors of an enemy attack are Hammer-Stein and his now-blind sergeant, a soldier who hates robots as much as he hates his country's Volgan foes. The sarge doesn't realize he's being guided by a robot, a misconception Hammer-Stein must foster if either of them is to survive.
That flashback is followed by several others. One is written by Alan Moore and drawn by Bryan Talbot while another is drawn by Dave Gibbons. See what I mean about 2000 AD launching so many super-star careers?
The longest story - "The Fall and Rise of Ro-Jaws and Hammer-Stein" by Mills and artists O'Neill, Mike McMahon, and Mike Dorey - runs 13 chapters. The cyborg owner of the Ro-Busters wants to rid himself of the underperforming company by arranging an accident and collecting the insurance on his robots. Tipped off about the plan, Hammer-Stein and Ro-Jaws save their fellow robots and then try to lead them to escape from Earth and a new home on a planet ruled by robots. It's exciting stuff with lots of dark humor and surprises. I'm hoping there's more Ro-Busters to come.
2000 AD Extreme Edition #24 is worth seeking out. It earns an impressive four out of five Tonys.
One of the most interesting books to cross my desk in recent months is The Virgin Project: Real People Share Real Stories [KDB Graphics; $25], an anthology of biographical vignettes by K.D. Boze and Stasia Kato with introduction by fellow Seattle cartoonist Ellen Forney. As you might guess from the title, these are tales of their subjects' first-time sexual experiences, gathered by Boze and Kato at various places and times, including during the Seattle Erotic Art Festival and the Victoria Erotic Art and Film Festival. As you might guess from that information, this book isn't suitable for all ages.
What it is...is a book filled with fascinating narratives of an experience common to most people, yet infinitely varied in its details. Some of the stories are joyful, some are hilarious, some are sad, and a few are downright horrific. Though the stories deal with human sexuality, the depictions of "the deed" are circumspect and tasteful.
Boze and Kato take artistic license to assure the anonymity of those who shared their stories, but said license never diminishes the true-to-life sensibilities of those stories. They also take a variety of approaches to adapting these accounts, keeping the book fresh throughout its 140-plus pages.
This is the first volume in a projected series on the subject, so it's not too late to share your own stories with Boze and Kato. As a personal favor to me, I would ask comics artists who draw in certain styles - you know who you are - to refrain from submitting their tales. Let's face it, you've never seen real women up close and you'll just embarrass yourself pretending you have. The rest of you can find contact information for Boze and Kato by visiting the website listed below.
The Virgin Project is a fine anthology, but its high price has to be a factor in my recommendation. The best "score" I can give it is an impressive four Tonys.
If you're interested in comics history, you need to get your hands on Jughead's Double Digest #138 [Archie; $3.69], which reprints the cover and interior stories of the 1949 Archie's Pal Jughead #1. Even if you're not an Archie reader, how can you pass on getting such key stories - plus over 150 pages of other new and old comics and features - for under four bucks?
The issue starts with a spiffy Fernando Ruiz/Bob Smith cover that plays off the 1949 cover and an informative article by Jeffrey Branch. The 1949 stories aren't classic per se, but they do offer some insights into the era. For example, Archie comics have never been slavish about their story-to-story continuity, but they were even less so back then. Jughead is a mediocre member of the school football team in the first of the vintage tales, but, two stories later, he's never been on the team.
The jealous, quick-tempered Moose plays a key role in another 1949 story, but, with no Midge in sight, it's a "Lottie Little" who he is romancing. The other nearly sixty-year-old tales have parts for Jughead's cousin Souphead, who hasn't been seen in the current comics for years, and Principal Weatherbee, who is pretty much the same as his modern counterpart.
As with the recent digest that reprinted Archie #1, the issue has a brand-new story in which Jughead travels back through time - and presumably into a parallel universe - and meets his 1949 self. Written by Ruiz with art by Jeff Shultz and Rich Koslowski, it's a cute tale with a warm and fuzzy ending.
The contemporary reprints range from the merely readable to the quite good with the best being "The Wrong Combination," one of those terrific Jughead vs. Reggie contests. There's lots of fun to be had in this digest.
Jughead's Double Digest #138 earns four Tonys. Watch for more of these special digests in the months to come. Next up is Betty and Veronica Digest #185, on sale in June, which reprints the 1950 Archie's Girls Betty and Veronica #1 in its entirety.
******
TONY'S MAILBOX
After the above column ran in CBG, I received an e-mail from Alan J. Porter taking exception to a portion of my review of Batman Unauthorized. He writes:
CBG #1643 arrived this afternoon and, as always, the first place I turned to was your Tony's Tips column. Imagine my delight at seeing Batman Unauthorized prominently displayed on page 43. This promptly turned to complete astonishment and shock when I read the sidebar extract that said "When Alan J. Porter tries to make the case that it doesn't matter who did what in Batman's early days..." Why astonishment? Because that conclusion is completely at odds with the point I was trying to make. Yes. the essay was subtitled "Who did what, and does it really matter?", but that was as much a journalistic trick to make people want to read the essay. My central point, or at least I thought it was, was that while the average guy watching the upcoming Dark Knight movie wouldn't care, it mattered a lot. That those of us who spent the time researching exactly who did what should be careful that we don't apply today's perspective to past events (a common trap for historians no matter what they are studying).
Over the years the recognition of Bill Finger and his status as co-creator of the Batman has been, and will continue to be a "personal crusade" (as Paul Levitz once described my obsession with Finger). All through the years I produced the Gotham Weekly News e-mail newsletter, the Gotham Gazette website and even in my Batman Collectors Guide book I have used the line "BATMAN created by Bill Finger and Bob Kane." For years I've been trying to get a joint biography of Finger and Kane off the ground with the stated aim of setting the record straight. Several publishers delivered "I'd love to read this, but I don't want to publish it" responses, until one publisher was candid enough to explain that the "setting the record straight" aspect was what concerned them more than anything. I'm still shopping the idea around and hope one day to find a publisher brave enough to take it on. In the meantime I continue to work with other Bill Finger researchers in amassing more evidence of who exactly did what.
Getting back to my Batman Unauthorized essay, I spent a considerable amount of time detailing Bill Finger's contribution to the Batman mythos and the ways that Bob Kane took advantage of Bill's character in glossing over or ignoring his work. In fact, I concluded with a line about Kane, that the fiction of his own interpretation of the facts had long ago overtaken the facts, i.e., that Bill Finger was the true co-creator of Batman.
The fact that you seemed to have drawn a diametrically opposed conclusion is deeply concerning. To paraphrase another great writer "I came to praise Bill Finger, not bury him."
Thanks for the response, Alan.
And thanks to my loyal legions of TOT readers for spending a part of their day with me.
I'll be back July 4 with more stuff.
Tony Isabella
<< 06/20/2008 | 06/23/2008 | 07/04/2008 >>
Discuss this column with me at my Message Board. Also, read Heroes and Villains: Real and Imagined.
Recent Columns:
| NEWEST | Finale (06/22/2010) |
| 06/17/2010 | I review Siege |
| 06/16/2010 | Linda Gold 1949-2010 |
| 06/15/2010 | Everett True Tuesday! |
| 06/14/2010 | I review The Amazing Adventures of Nate Banks #1: Secret Identity Crisis, Secret Identity Crisis: Comic Books and the Unmasking of Cold War America and The Walking Dead Volume 2: Miles Behind Us. |
| Archives >> |
Current TOT >>
TOT Archives |
About Tony |
Message Board
|
|
THE "TONY" SCALE
ZERO: Burn your money before buying any comic receiving this rating. It doesn't *necessarily* mean there's absolutely nothing of value here - though it *could* - but whatever value it might possess shrinks into insignificance before its overall awfulness.
ONE: Buy something else. Maybe I found something which wasn't completely dreadful in the item, but not enough for me to recommend it when there are better comics available. I only want what's best for you, my children.
TWO: Basic judgment call. I found some value, but not enough to recommend it. My review should give you enough info to decide if you want to take a chance on it. Are you feeling lucky today, punk? Well, are you?
THREE: This denotes something I find perfectly respectable. There are better books out there, but I wouldn't regret buying this item. Based on my review, you should be able to determine if it's of interest to you. Let the Force guide you.
FOUR: I recommend anything earning this rating. Unless you don't like the genre, subject matter, or past work of the creators, I believe you'll enjoy this item. Isn't it uncanny how I can look right into your soul that way?
FIVE: Anything getting this rating is among the best comicdom has to offer. You should buy/read this, even if the genre/subject matter doesn't appeal to you. It's for your own good. Me, I live for comics and books this good...but not in a pathetic "Comic-Book Guy" sort of way.
Please send material you would like me to review to:
Tony's Online Tips
840 Damon Drive
Medina, OH 44256
|
|
Anything Goes Trivia
