Wood wrote: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.
Wood wrote:
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.
Wood wrote:
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.
Wood wrote:
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.
