Weekly Comic Spotlight #46 Discussion Thread

[Wood]

Weekly Comics Spotlight #046: 2008-06-25
By JohnMayo at 6:00 am

John Mayo and Bob Bretall discuss Final Crisis #2 by DC, Young Avengers Presents #6 by Marvel and Fear Agent #22 by Dark Horse.

Time Codes:
00:00 Intro
00:36 General discussion
08:44 DC: FINAL CRISIS #2
30:32 Marvel: YOUNG AVENGERS PRESENTS #6
34:48 Other: FEAR AGENT #22 [DARK HORSE]
40:51 Next Week Promo
41:04 Wrap up
41:34 End of episode.

Links:
Discount Comic Book Service: http://www.DCBService.com
Comics Podcast Network: http://www.comicspodcasts.com
DCBS Daily Blog: http://thedailyblog.dcbservice.com/?cat=87

Email us at TheGuys@ComicBookPage.com

Join the discussion on our forum at: http://forum.comicbookpage.com

This podcast episode originated on the Comic Book Page website: http://www.ComicBookPage.com

[Wood]

Hey Guys, fun episode as usual.

I really liked that you started off the episode with an issue by issue breakdown of your haul. I find myself often wondering what you guys are buying that I'm not. Now I know!

Onto the meat of the episode. First, let me get the Marvel and Dark Horse stuff out of the way.

As you know, I'm a HUGE Alan Davis fan. He's one of my favorite artists of all time. And Hawkeye has long been a favorite Avenger. So it's no surprise that I shared your enthusiasm for this issue and felt it was the strongest of the 6 one-shots. Like Bob, I sure hope we see these characters used with regularity. For some reason Marvel seems to keep holding out for Alan Heinberg to make a return but I'm not sure why there aren't other writers capable of telling great stories with the Young Avengers.

As to Fear Agent, I've been on that train for some time. Remender is a cool dude and most of his stuff is a real yarn. He's got a passion for so many different genres, and it shines through in each. I've even enjoyed Crawl Space, which is not for the feint of heart. As to Fear Agent, I know from Chris Neseman that Remender considers Fear Agent his passion. That's the one title that I think best represents what Remender wants to do in the medium. John hit it right, this is pulpy science fiction with an over-the-top comedic bite. As I read the arcs, all I can do is see Bruce Campbell playing the role of Heath Huston. It's fun stuff. One minor quip with something Bob said, I personally love Tony Moore's work too but I happen to think Jerome Opena is as good, if not better suited for Fear Agent. Both are really well suited for this kind of story though.

OK, now let's get to Final Crisis #2.

I can totally understand that Morrison's story-telling may not be something to suit everyone. In fact, I would go so far as to say that anyone completely unfamiliar with his style would be put off by reading Final Crisis; particularly if they were expecting another standard, straight forward event book. I get that.

But what I struggle to understand is hearing someone like John (who's opinion I genuinely respect, and generally sees eye-to-eye with my own) would be so dismissive of the work and go so far as to say "Geoff Johns should be writing this."

No he shouldn't.

Look, Johns is a master at what he does. But so is Morrison. Johns is at the top of his game right now and, yes, if DC wanted to tell an accessible action packed story that was opiate for the masses, Johns would be the guy to do it. But that's not what Final Crisis is about.

Johns is equivalent to the guy who writes screenplays for the biggest summer blockbusters. They're well paced, entertaining, linear, earn bunches of dough. Good, straightforward, entertainment.

Morrison is something much different. He's the guy who wins an Oscar for his screenplay. His style isn't linear, by design. He makes you work for every nuance but, when it's all said and done, his stuff has an impact that few if any other comic book writers can match.

This idea that Final Crisis is somehow failing because of the non-linear complexities boggles my mind. At what point did DiDio, anyone at DC or Morrison suggest it WOULD be a straightforward linear story? As someone who knows Morrison's work, why would you be surprised by the way the story is unfolding?

You don't hire Grant Morrison to write a big event if you want a story that goes from Point A to Point B to Point C. It's just not what he's good at. It would be like hiring Picasso to draw the plans for your new skyscraper. Completely different skill sets.

So far, Morrison has done EXACTLY what a) I expect of him and b ) what he promised. He made it clear he intended to pay homage to Kirby's Fourth World, and that when all was said and done, this would be an event unlike any in DC's history.

In interviews I've seen with Morrison, he's aware that this needs to be epic. By all accounts, he intends to do things in this book that are universe-changing. Why doubt him? DC wouldn't have hired Morrison (and he wouldn't have taken the gig) if he wasn't given a LOT of leeway on this front.

Again, if Morrison isn't your cup of tea, I get that. But it sounded to me like you were expecting something from Final Crisis you really shouldn't have been. You were expecting Final Crisis by Geoff Johns, and it's really unfair to judge Morrison's work against that expectation. Just as it would equally unfair to judge Johns against something like Seven Soldiers.

[JohnMayo]

Hey Guys, fun episode as usual.

I really liked that you started off the episode with an issue by issue breakdown of your haul. I find myself often wondering what you guys are buying that I'm not. Now I know!

I'm glad you liked that. I figured with each of us getting over 50 comics that it made sense to do a quick run down of what all we got. The funny thing is that the shipment I just got yesterday was also about 50 comics or so in size. There is a ton of stuff coming out these days.

Onto the meat of the episode. First, let me get the Marvel and Dark Horse stuff out of the way.

As you know, I'm a HUGE Alan Davis fan. He's one of my favorite artists of all time. And Hawkeye has long been a favorite Avenger. So it's no surprise that I shared your enthusiasm for this issue and felt it was the strongest of the 6 one-shots. Like Bob, I sure hope we see these characters used with regularity. For some reason Marvel seems to keep holding out for Alan Heinberg to make a return but I'm not sure why there aren't other writers capable of telling great stories with the Young Avengers.

There are other writers that could do great things with the Young Avengers. Heck, more stories have been told with the Young Avengers outside of their title than in it between the various Runaways/Young Avengers titles for Civil War, World War Hulk and Secret Invasion and now Young Avengers Presents.

As to Fear Agent, I've been on that train for some time. Remender is a cool dude and most of his stuff is a real yarn. He's got a passion for so many different genres, and it shines through in each. I've even enjoyed Crawl Space, which is not for the feint of heart. As to Fear Agent, I know from Chris Neseman that Remender considers Fear Agent his passion. That's the one title that I think best represents what Remender wants to do in the medium. John hit it right, this is pulpy science fiction with an over-the-top comedic bite. As I read the arcs, all I can do is see Bruce Campbell playing the role of Heath Huston. It's fun stuff. One minor quip with something Bob said, I personally love Tony Moore's work too but I happen to think Jerome Opena is as good, if not better suited for Fear Agent. Both are really well suited for this kind of story though.

Bruce Campbell would be great casting for Heath Huston.

OK, now let's get to Final Crisis #2.

I can totally understand that Morrison's story-telling may not be something to suit everyone. In fact, I would go so far as to say that anyone completely unfamiliar with his style would be put off by reading Final Crisis; particularly if they were expecting another standard, straight forward event book. I get that.

But what I struggle to understand is hearing someone like John (who's opinion I genuinely respect, and generally sees eye-to-eye with my own) would be so dismissive of the work and go so far as to say "Geoff Johns should be writing this."

No he shouldn't.

Look, Johns is a master at what he does. But so is Morrison. Johns is at the top of his game right now and, yes, if DC wanted to tell an accessible action packed story that was opiate for the masses, Johns would be the guy to do it. But that's not what Final Crisis is about.

Johns is equivalent to the guy who writes screenplays for the biggest summer blockbusters. They're well paced, entertaining, linear, earn bunches of dough. Good, straightforward, entertainment.

Morrison is something much different. He's the guy who wins an Oscar for his screenplay. His style isn't linear, by design. He makes you work for every nuance but, when it's all said and done, his stuff has an impact that few if any other comic book writers can match.

This idea that Final Crisis is somehow failing because of the non-linear complexities boggles my mind. At what point did DiDio, anyone at DC or Morrison suggest it WOULD be a straightforward linear story? As someone who knows Morrison's work, why would you be surprised by the way the story is unfolding?

You don't hire Grant Morrison to write a big event if you want a story that goes from Point A to Point B to Point C. It's just not what he's good at. It would be like hiring Picasso to draw the plans for your new skyscraper. Completely different skill sets.

So far, Morrison has done EXACTLY what a) I expect of him and b ) what he promised. He made it clear he intended to pay homage to Kirby's Fourth World, and that when all was said and done, this would be an event unlike any in DC's history.

In interviews I've seen with Morrison, he's aware that this needs to be epic. By all accounts, he intends to do things in this book that are universe-changing. Why doubt him? DC wouldn't have hired Morrison (and he wouldn't have taken the gig) if he wasn't given a LOT of leeway on this front.

Again, if Morrison isn't your cup of tea, I get that. But it sounded to me like you were expecting something from Final Crisis you really shouldn't have been. You were expecting Final Crisis by Geoff Johns, and it's really unfair to judge Morrison's work against that expectation. Just as it would equally unfair to judge Johns against something like Seven Soldiers.

I wasn't trying to be dismissive of Morrison's work. My point was that had Geoff Johns written it, even if it was still plotted by Morrison, we would have gotten a much more accessible story. And, frankly, while Morrison is great at the intricate storylines, that isn't what I think people expect from a Crisis event from DC.

I'm not saying it has to be a straight linear storyline, just that it needs to hook people. I'm a hardcore DC universe fan. Geoff Johns is doing some of the best stuff in the DC Universe write now and having him on the big event title would make sense.

Final Crisis hasn't really hooked me yet and I'm not a hard sell on these kinds of things. It is perfectly good and well told but I'm only mildly intrigued by it so far.

For good or bad, Final Crisis may well set the stage for how DC does over the next few years. DC needs to have a home run here and so far they don't. The death in the first issue lacked impact and the mention of a possible resurrection for that character in the second issue undercut what little impact the death had. (Nevermind the fact that the character magically appeared in the first issue flying in the face of the characters recently established status quo.)

DC does need an Oscar level storyline and Morrison is the right guy to do that. But events are the equivalents to the summer blockbuster action films, not the Oscar winning screenplays. A miniseries bringing back the new New Gods would have been a perfect thing for Morrison. But having that be the climax of years worth of build up and events isn't the place for it. At least not for me.

I agree that Morrison is writing a Morrison story. That is why I think he was the wrong guy for the job.

One of the core problems I'm having with Final Crisis is that there is too much leeway with the continuity. It isn't meshing with what I'm reading elsewhere in the DC universe right now. But that isn't the fault of Morrison but of DC editorial. Still, if gets annoying when the big event for the DC universe feels a bit disconnected from the rest of the DC universe.

As for expectations for Final Crisis, DC did a bad job setting those expectations. Based on the name and the recently returned and ignored multiverse, I expected something more like Crisis on Infinite Earths or Infinite Crisis than what I've gotten.

The ads I was seeing for Final Crisis had the core JLA and text implying that while legends live for ever, heroes can die. That lead me to expect a more JLA centric story. So far, the Japan stuff is something I'm interested in but not something that seems connected to whatever the main story of Final Crisis is.

Given the contents of Countdown to Final Crisis, I think it is fair to have expected characters like the Titans, Mary Marvel, Pied Piper, Jimmy Olsen, Harley and Holly and the Ray Palmer Atom to have played some sort of role in Final Crisis. So far, that hasn't really happened. But, again, that probably isn't Morrison's fault so much as DC editorial.

Am I judging Final Crisis unfairly?

No, I don't think so. I'm judging it as an Crisis "event" level miniseries from DC based on the way it was promoted based on both things in continuity and the in house ads.

What I'm not doing is judging it on what Morrison has been saying in interviews. While he may intend to do universe-changing things in the series, I have yet to see it in the first two issues.

I'm sure that once the full series is out that all of the pieces will fit together fairly well. Morrison is very good at that. But until then, it lacks that extra excitement that I expect in a DC Crisis.

[jonah]

John, you hit the nail on the head as far as what is missing from Final 'Crisis.' I feel that DC using CRISIS in the title leads to a very specific expectation of the Multiverse and the use of DC's mainstay characters. The story, at least to this point, has no flavor of a Crisis in the DC universe as we've come to know it and in that way, I've been disappointed. The story has me interested at this point but I don't have the Crisis jones going. Perhaps this story will eventually wind up feeling like a crisis but I'd prefer a more linear approach to getting there. Unfortunately, I don't think this story is going to provide direction for the DC universe going forward which I feel is needed. After the Omac Story line and Identity Crisis stories, DC seems to have lost it's way. Also, choosing to kill Martian Manhunter I thought was ill advised. The Justice League Cartoon made him into an extremely cool character that kids could identify with.

That said, the art is good and I like the new gods so this would have been a pick up regardless. I feel confident that Morrison will give me a story I will ultimately enjoy but I'm less confident that at the end of it, the DCU will be any more interesting or changed.

Looking at the Legion of 3 worlds solicitation, I'm expecting more of a crisis flavor there. Here's hoping.

[Wood]

I guess where we disagree John and jonah is that this very much DOES have a feeling of a Crisis. Morrison is non-linear, but he's laid a lot of clues to suggest that we're in for a HOLY (bleep) kind of upheaval when all is said and done.

Identity Crisis (which was the reason I got into DC full boar after 20 years of largely ignoring it BTW) was a very intimate story, yet it was a Crisis.

I'm sure you have both read this interview with Grant already:

http://www.newsarama.com/comics/080609- ... nFC01.html

But how then can you read that and tell me this isn't going to be ENORMOUS and EPIC? We've had two very tightly written, ultra-detailed, nuanced issues of setup. It's clear that the proverbial (bleep) hits the fan in Issue #3, so much so that we're given a month off to let everyone digest what's to transpire in the final four issues.

Patience, folks. Morrison never disappoints when all is said and done.

[JohnMayo]

I guess where we disagree John and jonah is that this very much DOES have a feeling of a Crisis. Morrison is non-linear, but he's laid a lot of clues to suggest that we're in for a HOLY (bleep) kind of upheaval when all is said and done.

Identity Crisis (which was the reason I got into DC full boar after 20 years of largely ignoring it BTW) was a very intimate story, yet it was a Crisis.

I'm sure you have both read this interview with Grant already:

http://www.newsarama.com/comics/080609- ... nFC01.html

But how then can you read that and tell me this isn't going to be ENORMOUS and EPIC? We've had two very tightly written, ultra-detailed, nuanced issues of setup. It's clear that the proverbial (bleep) hits the fan in Issue #3, so much so that we're given a month off to let everyone digest what's to transpire in the final four issues.

Patience, folks. Morrison never disappoints when all is said and done.

Well, for starters, I haven't read that interview. I've seen quotes here and there from Morrison but I'm trying avoid spoilers and enjoy the story as it happens. (And I am enjoying it even though I do find it to be a lackluster Crisis so far.)

Identity Crisis was a unique kind of Crisis for DC as no parallel worlds were involved. But it was a good mystery storyline and one that started of with a strong opening and kept raising the stakes each issue.

I'm not saying that Final Crisis isn't going to be ENORMOUS and EPIC when it is all said and done. What I'm saying is that it hasn't been that yet.

I do hope that it kicks into high gear with the next issue. We'll see if that happens or not.

I agree that Morrison is a very talented writer and one capable of much deeper and richer stories than most comic book writers. But, for me, he can and has disappointed a time or two. I found the Seven Soldiers stuff was good in places, okay in places and boring in places.

Don't get me wrong, Jason, I see where you are coming from. Your faith in Morrison's writing is understandable. I just find that two issues of set up is a bit much for a miniseries that is the third part of two trilogies.
(Trilogy 1: Crisis on Infinite Earths --> Infinite Crisis --> Final Crisis)
(Trilogy 2: Identity Crisis --> Infinite Crisis --> Final Crisis)

I'll need to reread the first two issues (and probably DC Universe #0) before commenting too much on the series being very tightly written, ultra-detailed and nuanced. While it shows a definite craft and style on the writing, the inaccessibility of it in places is a bit of a turn off for me.

I'll be more than happy to sing the praises of the series if it pulls together and delivers. I just can't do that based on these two issues.

[jonah]

I guess where we disagree John and jonah is that this very much DOES have a feeling of a Crisis. Morrison is non-linear, but he's laid a lot of clues to suggest that we're in for a HOLY (bleep) kind of upheaval when all is said and done.

Identity Crisis (which was the reason I got into DC full boar after 20 years of largely ignoring it BTW) was a very intimate story, yet it was a Crisis.

I'm sure you have both read this interview with Grant already:

http://www.newsarama.com/comics/080609- ... nFC01.html

But how then can you read that and tell me this isn't going to be ENORMOUS and EPIC? We've had two very tightly written, ultra-detailed, nuanced issues of setup. It's clear that the proverbial (bleep) hits the fan in Issue #3, so much so that we're given a month off to let everyone digest what's to transpire in the final four issues.

Patience, folks. Morrison never disappoints when all is said and done.

Well, for starters, I haven't read that interview. I've seen quotes here and there from Morrison but I'm trying avoid spoilers and enjoy the story as it happens. (And I am enjoying it even though I do find it to be a lackluster Crisis so far.)

Identity Crisis was a unique kind of Crisis for DC as no parallel worlds were involved. But it was a good mystery storyline and one that started of with a strong opening and kept raising the stakes each issue.

I'm not saying that Final Crisis isn't going to be ENORMOUS and EPIC when it is all said and done. What I'm saying is that it hasn't been that yet.

I do hope that it kicks into high gear with the next issue. We'll see if that happens or not.

I agree that Morrison is a very talented writer and one capable of much deeper and richer stories than most comic book writers. But, for me, he can and has disappointed a time or two. I found the Seven Soldiers stuff was good in places, okay in places and boring in places.

Don't get me wrong, Jason, I see where you are coming from. Your faith in Morrison's writing is understandable. I just find that two issues of set up is a bit much for a miniseries that is the third part of two trilogies.
(Trilogy 1: Crisis on Infinite Earths --> Infinite Crisis --> Final Crisis)
(Trilogy 2: Identity Crisis --> Infinite Crisis --> Final Crisis)

I'll need to reread the first two issues (and probably DC Universe #0) before commenting too much on the series being very tightly written, ultra-detailed and nuanced. While it shows a definite craft and style on the writing, the inaccessibility of it in places is a bit of a turn off for me.

I'll be more than happy to sing the praises of the series if it pulls together and delivers. I just can't do that based on these two issues.

Actually I haven't read the interview either and have been going out of my way to avoid both the crisis and secret invasion interviews / articles. I'm really wanting to read the story's without them being spoiled. Hard to do in this day and age. But remember the sheer joy of reading the original Crisis without knowing what's coming. I still get worked up reading the story and seeing Supergirl's final battle (at least final for a while).

I could argue that one shouldn't need an interview, supporting web site, blog, etc. to explain an ongoing title though with Morrison's writing, it's usually insightful. I'd prefer to save the writeups/notes/etc til the event is over and then read what I should have gotten out of it. I do listen to some of the podcasts covering the events but for the most part, getting around the spoilers.

I'm not judging the story until it's over however I still feel like I picked up a book that has the wrong title on it. I'll swing to the other side if Morrison's story takes me there. Hopefully sooner rather than later.

[Wood]

I'm really looking forward to judging this when all seven issues are done. I appreciate you guys entertaining my perspective on this. In many ways, while inevitable, I kind of feel that this series almost can't be reviewed on an issue by issue basis. We all do it, and obviously if they release it in seven issues one could argue it should read well that way. But then again, I couldn't imagine having enjoyed Animal Man, We3 or Seven Soldiers in monthly form, either.

[comicm]

Just want to drop a line and give my two cents. I am absolutely loving Final Crisis. Maybe it is because I love all of the Kirby creations. I will have to agree with one thing Bob stated. He said if he had time to read it more then once he can see people getting more enjoyment. He is 100% right. This book really makes me think and want to find out more and to that is why I love this book so much. I have read Final Crisis #1 about 5 times and Final Crisis #2 3 times. As far as quantity of books I had for the week I totaled 56 comics. I just fell behind in reading because of the extra 7 times I read the same comic over again. I took my time reading this book where as most books for me are 10 - 15 minutes depending on the book. I spent much more time with these books.

The overall story to me is about the New Gods coming back from a Ragnarok type event. A mystery and the Supervillains rise to power. I personally am loving Turpin (Newsboy Legion, MSCU), New Gods, Sunny Somo (From Forever People), Mister Miracle and Kamandi. To me this seems like Grant has an appreciation for the King. The story is so much deeper and that is why I love it. It makes me think.

I do agree that this is not assessible at all to new readers. I think I would be lost if I was new to the DC Universe. DC tends to do this more then Marvel. I think Marvel events in general are easier to follow if you have not been reading for years. The DC events not so much because they cater to the long time fan.

There really is a lot to absorb in this book and I for one am glad it is not linear. I do value both of your opinions and just wanted to throw my views of Final Crisis in there.

Keep up the great work guys.

[BobBretall]

Look, Johns is a master at what he does. But so is Morrison. Johns is at the top of his game right now and, yes, if DC wanted to tell an accessible action packed story that was opiate for the masses, Johns would be the guy to do it. But that's not what Final Crisis is about.

I guess the fact that DC did such a feeble job of setting expectations about the series through their vague ads is why I did not know exactly what to expect. You say that being an accessible story that is an opiate for the masses is not what Final Crisis is about. OK. Well, that's essentially what the previous 2 "Crisis" series were, so why am I so far off base to expect the "Final" crisis to be similar in style to the previous 2??

Johns is equivalent to the guy who writes screenplays for the biggest summer blockbusters. They're well paced, entertaining, linear, earn bunches of dough. Good, straightforward, entertainment.

Morrison is something much different. He's the guy who wins an Oscar for his screenplay. His style isn't linear, by design. He makes you work for every nuance but, when it's all said and done, his stuff has an impact that few if any other comic book writers can match.

Yeah, I get that. I don't particularly care for the convoluted storytelling in this mainstream DC event, I think it was a mistake on DC's part. Just my opinion.

Morrison doing Seven Soldiers like this? Fine. Doing the "Final" Crisis like this? Mistake. Again, my opinion.

This idea that Final Crisis is somehow failing because of the non-linear complexities boggles my mind. At what point did DiDio, anyone at DC or Morrison suggest it WOULD be a straightforward linear story? As someone who knows Morrison's work, why would you be surprised by the way the story is unfolding?

No one at DC set ANY expectations. My expectations (as I said above) were driven mostly by the "CRISIS" in the title. I should have known better when I saw Morrision's name on the solicit.

You don't hire Grant Morrison to write a big event if you want a story that goes from Point A to Point B to Point C. It's just not what he's good at. It would be like hiring Picasso to draw the plans for your new skyscraper. Completely different skill sets.

Point taken. I return to my earlier statement that I feel this was a mistake on DC's part. History will tell though. Maybe this will end up being the Watchmen of the 21st century.

So far, Morrison has done EXACTLY what a) I expect of him and b ) what he promised. He made it clear he intended to pay homage to Kirby's Fourth World, and that when all was said and done, this would be an event unlike any in DC's history.

In interviews I've seen with Morrison, he's aware that this needs to be epic. By all accounts, he intends to do things in this book that are universe-changing. Why doubt him? DC wouldn't have hired Morrison (and he wouldn't have taken the gig) if he wasn't given a LOT of leeway on this front.

I have not read any of these interviews. I steer well clear of Newsarama & other spoiler-filled sites except to check out early solicits when they come out one a month. I prefer to hear (or read) people talking about stuff after I have had a chance to read (and judge) it for myself.

In my opinion, a story that is made clearer or is justified by reading extra material like interviews is a poorly constructed story. Again, my opinion. I think you should be able to read & enjoy a story based solely on what is present IN THE STORY.

Again, if Morrison isn't your cup of tea, I get that. But it sounded to me like you were expecting something from Final Crisis you really shouldn't have been. You were expecting Final Crisis by Geoff Johns, and it's really unfair to judge Morrison's work against that expectation. Just as it would equally unfair to judge Johns against something like Seven Soldiers.

I was not judging Morrison against a "Geoff Johns" standard. I was judging him against a "what kind of story I like" standard. That's what I do when I review a book. It is true that this intersects reasonably well with Geoff Johns stories, however.

At the end of the day, John & I were giving our opinions of how much WE enjoyed the story. That's it. Other people will read this and love it. Hopefully for DC there will be more people who love it than who are confused by it and ambivalent towards it. I'll buy the rest of the series, in any event, I suspect that is more than many people with similar opinions of the 1st 2 issues will do.

[Wood]

Bob...totally understand your perspective. To be honest, my initial reply was more directed at John who expressly said Geoff Johns should have written this. It seemed you were reasonably positive about FC so far, unless I misunderstood your take on things.

In any event, I think there are two very polarizing ideas at play here that I want to thank you for bringing to light (because I hadn't seen it that way):

*** The notion of what "Crisis" implies as it relates to reader expectations
*** The notion of what "Written by Grant Morrison" implies in the same vein

To me, these are not mutually exclusive. I guess I take "Crisis" to imply a major event that impacts the entire DC universe and, when it's done, re-sets the status quo in some way. So I can't really say whether this meet my idea of "Crisis" until it's over. Although I suspect once Issue #3 is out, this series will much closer meet your stated view of what a "Crisis" is all about. As I understand things, #3 is when the proverbial (bleep) hits the proverbial fan.

[JohnMayo]

I guess I take "Crisis" to imply a major event that impacts the entire DC universe and, when it's done, re-sets the status quo in some way.

That seems like a fair assessment of what a Crisis is for DC.

My question in response to that is what, if anything, has happened in the first two issues of Final Crisis that is "event worthy"?

The death of the end of issue #1? Maybe but that seems like a stretch since it seemed almost incidental to the story. Heck, the funeral for that character only got a single page in issue #2. this could have easily happened in a "regular" non-event comic. And, frankly, a case could be made that his death seemed to be implied at the end of Salvation Run #7.

The return of the character at the end of Final Crisis #2? That character has come back (or at least appeared to) a few times in the pages of normal monthly comics before.

The murder that Turpin is investigating? That didn't happen in the pages of Final Crisis.

So far, nothing has had universe changing impact nor does such an impact seem to be on the horizon based on the story in Final Crisis #1 and #2.

So far, the series hasn't met my expectations for a Crisis level event. That could and hopefully will change with the next issue.

As for the expectations for something written by Grant Morrison, that is why I said it shouldn't have been written by him. Morrison's strengths are best used elsewhere in the DC universe. This really needed to be a much much exciting and accessible event than it has been so far. Geoff Johns could have delivered that.

The bottom line is that DC editorial dropped the ball on this. The lead up to Final Crisis has seriously undercut the impact of the story which is very unfair to Grant Morrison. Add to that my opinion that Grant Morrison was the wrong pick as writer for this series and you wind up with a series that I find a bit disappointing so far. That isn't to say I didn't like, understand or appreciate the story and craft involved in putting it together. Just that I was expecting something more along the lines of Crisis on Infinite Earths, Identity Crisis and Infinite Crisis than I feel we have gotten so far.

[Wood]

John,

I think we're converging to a form of agreement. Nothing, taken unto itself, in the first two issues would classify as "Crisis-worthy." But again that's because this is "Morrison" Crisis What we're reading now and thinking, "Huh...that's interesting but doesn't seem like that big a deal" is going to prove to be clues to an enormous "big" picture experience when all is said and done.

[JohnMayo]

John,

I think we're converging to a form of agreement. Nothing, taken unto itself, in the first two issues would classify as "Crisis-worthy." But again that's because this is "Morrison" Crisis What we're reading now and thinking, "Huh...that's interesting but doesn't seem like that big a deal" is going to prove to be clues to an enormous "big" picture experience when all is said and done.

I really hope you are right and with Morrison I'm willing to give it the benefit of the doubt.

Hopefully Super Young Team will turn into much more than the derivative wannabes that they currently appear to be. While I appreciate the layered storytelling the Morrison is capable of (and wish more writers were), I think that having somebody like Geoff Johns scripting on top of Morrison's plot could have given us the best of both worlds.

On the other hand, I felt that Infinite Crisis started off very strong and fizzled after the few few issues with more story being alluded to than actually told. Likewise, Civil War and World War Hulk were very entertaining stories but lacked much in the way of depth.

In any case, it should be fun to see where Final Crisis goes and how the DC universe is or isn't changed long term as a result. (After all, One Year Later was a big shake up for a month or two but is the DC universe really all that much different now than it was before?)

[BobBretall]

John,

I think we're converging to a form of agreement. Nothing, taken unto itself, in the first two issues would classify as "Crisis-worthy." But again that's because this is "Morrison" Crisis What we're reading now and thinking, "Huh...that's interesting but doesn't seem like that big a deal" is going to prove to be clues to an enormous "big" picture experience when all is said and done.

I can agree with this also. This is a "Morrison Crisis", not a "Crisis Crisis". As long as I set my expectations accordingly, all will be OK.

That being said, previous Crisis series have been a roller coaster ride from the word "go", so changing gears here (again I beat my drum) especially in light of the feeble job DC did marketing the event & setting expectations that this would be totally dis-similar in style from the previous crises. Well, I guess people hard-core into comics who know what a "Morrison style" is won't be surprised, but casual readers are screwed. Another data point to a series that is "insider friendly".

The "insider friendly" aspect is why DC is losing out in sales to Marvel, IMO. Sometimes being a "opiate to the masses" makes good business sense