JLA: YEAR ONE Review

[JulianPerez]

Good, but flawed.

The idea behind this mini was to weave a characterization-centered story into JLA history, as in the Gardner Fox era, stories were more plot-centered than character-centered. There was an opportunity here to tell something extraordinary, however, Mark Waid has many strengths as a writer, but characterization is not one of them. In the hands of someone like Kurt Busiek who combines a knowledge of human behavior and emotions with encyclopediac knowledge of history, it may have been amazing.

Mark Waid, unfortunately, has the bad luck of following up Gardner Fox, one of the greatest geniuses comics had ever seen writing possibly the greatest comic ever written. No matter how great Waid gets, he will nonetheless suffer in the comparison to Fox. So, here he is writing over Fox's JUSTICE LEAGUE OF AMERICA, and predictably, there's not a moment where Waid tops Fox.

Will they ever do a JLA: Year Two or so, possibly involving Zatanna and the Elongated Man? Being a big Englehart fan, if handled properly it would be interesting to see an approach to the JLA sattelite years.

My thoughts on reading the mini went like this: where the HELL are Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman?

The retcon that these characters had "never" been involved with the Justice League until recently is fairly insulting both to the history of these characters and to the intelligence of the reader. Granted, it's been years since I forced myself to slog though Byrne's MAN OF STEEL (ugh), but is there really anything in there that denies that Superman could have participated in the Silver Age JLA adventures apart from arbitrary edict?

This series felt aggrivating because no doubt one of the reasons to justify its existence is to cram down the throat of the reader the "new" history of the DC Universe, where Superman was never a Leaguer (huh?) and Black Canary was ALWAYS there from the outset. Heck, why not say that Guy Gardner was a founding member of the Justice League while we're at it?

Though intellectually I have to admit I grasp the concept that all the various earths had their histories united, it nonetheless feels weird to see a splash page with Aquaman rubbing shoulders with Human Bomb. The idea that JLA would be contemporary with the original Blue Beetle and a youthened JSA somehow feels...well, WRONG. There's an element of cognitive dissonance that prevents one from truly appreciating the series.

Some people prefer Marvel, some prefer DC. Me, I prefer Marvel because they have a more concrete sense of history. They don't pull this kind of nonsense, at least some of the things the DC people ask us fans to swallow sometimes.

As for the series itself:

It has its moments. The Martian Manhunter is wonderfully characterized with a veneration for human life, a quiet, introverted personality; Waid gets a sense of who the character is. Though Waid doesn't nearly know as much about DC history as everybody says he does: during this period Manhunter was essentially a Superman clone with no beetle brow, and a little horned alien sidekick named Zoot. Where's Zoot, Mark?

The thousands of Appelaxians attacking en masse was astonishing; comics have a nearly infinite special effects budget, and here it shows. Ditto for the battle of the thousands of flying heroes against the gold bird appelaxians - that's one desktop-worthy panel right there.

The JLA have some extraordinarily brilliant tactical moves: Aquaman tearing out a pipe to dilute Clayface and then Manhunter using Heat Beams to bake him solid. Or the Lantern ring creating disguises so the Appelaxians use the wrong weapons...pure genius. This is the sort of plan the Fox league would have.

Vandal Savage saying "Your biggest mistake is insulting Stonehenge. Nobody ever appreciated my design." Hee hee hee.

The mystery of the JLA's financier was stylishly done and well thought through. Here's one place where JLA: YEAR ONE filled its promise to fill in the gaps of the original stories: who was it that paid for all that stuff, anyway?

Tom Peyer's HOURMAN did the impossible: make me actually like the most annoying kid sidekick in the history of humans, "Snapper" Carr. Mark Waid continued that tradition: "Snapper" was actually pretty cool. Though having "Snapper" be a resourceful plucky young computer hacker that can break into the NSA is going a little too far.

One sequence that was supposed to have been suspenseful but was instead just plain boring was where Hal Jordan has to save a plane from crashing. This sequence probably played out much better in Mark Waid's head than it does on the printed page for one reason: comics page have no motion. They are still pictures. The exilaration of all that Han Solo type stuff comes from the presence of motion. Thus, instead of being thrilling, the plane sequence came off as frozen and flat.

[Sk8maven]

And that's not even "going there" with all the little anachronisms - the presence of the Seven Soldiers of Victory at a time before they had been retrieved from being scattered across the past; the presence of Uncle Sam at a time when he shouldn't have been there because the American Talisman had been shattered and not yet reunited; etc.

I'll give Golden Age Flash the benefit of the doubt because Barry could have liberated Jay and Keystone late in Year One (that was a "two Flashes" story, not a JLA/JSA story).

But who the [expletive deleted] were those Blackhawks, since they were all far too young to have been the World War II originals?

All the little "Easter eggs" were very nice, even though not all of them made sense.

Maven

[Bored at 3:00AM]

JLA: Year One was pretty much killed by the silly retcons made to "official" continuity that prevented Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman from being members--which is a deal breaker for a comic about the origins of the Justice League.

JLA: Year One wanted to be what New Frontier was, which is a vastly superior book in almost every concievable way. And it doesn't help that Barry Kitson's perfectly capable art suffers greatly compared to Darwyn Cooke, who is shaping up to be a comics heavyweight.

I mean, not letting Wonder Woman appear in a comic called JLA: Year One? Please. And you just know this retcon will last for another five seconds anyway.

Mark Waid is very hit and miss. This is a miss, but worth reading once.

[borateen]

I guess I'm kinda glad I didn't know about the changes and retcons that took place. Without knowing them, I found the book to be a great read.

[Paul Newell]

Some people prefer Marvel, some prefer DC. Me, I prefer Marvel because they have a more concrete sense of history. They don't pull this kind of nonsense, at least some of the things the DC people ask us fans to swallow sometimes.

You mean like Spider-man: Year One? ;)

[Apathy Boy]

The first half of JLA: YEAR ONE, when the emphasis was on character development and seeing the JLA learn to work with each other and become friends, was fantastic.

The second half, when the story's goofy-ass plot took over, ruined the series for me. World-threatening alien invasions are way overdone. Plus, I could not understand why the invaders would hold all the world's superheroes captive instead of killing them, but that's just the Scott Evil in me talking.

Waid also shamelessly pilfered JLA: YEAR ONE's big character moment in the follow-up to his "Tower of Babel" arc.

[JulianPerez]

The second half, when the story's goofy-ass plot took over, ruined the series for me. World-threatening alien invasions are way overdone. Plus, I could not understand why the invaders would hold all the world's superheroes captive instead of killing them, but that's just the Scott Evil in me talking.

The explanation was that they wanted to dissect the heroes to learn how their powers function. JLA: YEAR ONE had many flaws, but I don't think that's one of them.

Waid also shamelessly pilfered JLA: YEAR ONE's big character moment in the follow-up to his "Tower of Babel" arc.

As I said in my review: Waid does not know as much about DC History as he thinks he does, or everyone says he does.

For instance, the drama of that big important character moment is lessened when one realizes that Flash and Green Lantern revealed their secret identities to one another INDEPENDENTLY of the entire group allll the way back in GREEN LANTERN #13 (1962). GL #13 could not have happened after the events of that JLA story

Thus, their secret identities - and the ensuing lack of trust caused by non-knowledge of such - is killed if you consider that the both of them know who the other are.

Maybe the both of them decided to just act surprised.

[dancj]

The first half of that review is devoted to complaints about changes to continuity that were made back in the mid-late 80's. I think it's a bit harsh to blame this book for being written consistently with the standing continuity of the time.

Personally I thought the story was decent enough, though nothing special and the art of Barry Kitson, while nice and clean is always too stiff for my liking. Worth a read, but nothing more than that

[Desaad]

JLA Year One was a solid story, but nothing particularly compelling or groundbreaking.

For my money, if you want an incredible origin of the JLA, take a peek at New Frontier.

Gets no better.



Astro

[Bob Violence]

JLA: Year One was pretty much killed by the silly retcons made to "official" continuity that prevented Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman from being members--which is a deal breaker for a comic about the origins of the Justice League.

This is exactly it. It's like some kind of freaky Elseworlds challenge: "Reinvent the JLA without Superman, Batman or Wonder Woman". But then they have to remake dozens of JLA stories to fit the new retcon.
What were they thinking?

[Paul Newell]

This is exactly it. It's like some kind of freaky Elseworlds challenge: "Reinvent the JLA without Superman, Batman or Wonder Woman". But then they have to remake dozens of JLA stories to fit the new retcon.
What were they thinking?
They were thinking they had to use the Post-Crisis origin, written by Keith Giffen in the 80's? The whole story follows on from Secret Origins #32.

It wasn't MArk Waids idea, but established continuity at the time.

[JulianPerez]

This is exactly it. It's like some kind of freaky Elseworlds challenge: "Reinvent the JLA without Superman, Batman or Wonder Woman". But then they have to remake dozens of JLA stories to fit the new retcon.
What were they thinking?

My sentiments exactly.

They were thinking they had to use the Post-Crisis origin, written by Keith Giffen in the 80's? The whole story follows on from Secret Origins #32.

It wasn't MArk Waids idea, but established continuity at the time.

Mark Waid should have spent more time researching the Silver Age League that he was supposed to be telling his story with, and less time with style-over-substance glamour boys like Giffen.

Many interpretations of characters exist, but that does not mean that all interpretations are EQUALLY valid.

Continuity is a valuable thing, yes, but what is even more important than details is preserving the SPIRIT of a concept. A JLA where there was never a Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman at the outset and where Black Canary II *was,* is not only disrespectful to Gardner Fox, but also fairly inappropriate to exactly what the Justice League IS, and the history of said characters with the group.

I don't see anybody shedding a tear that Byrne's reworking of the Incredible Hulk origin was just sort of...abandoned. If the 1990s idea that the Metal Men were in fact human was just quietly dropped I doubt anybody would care and someone might even get some polite applause for it.

Likewise, Mark Waid had an opportunity here to say, "you know, Gardner Fox, Steve Englehart, John Broome, Dennis O'Neil, Gerry Conway...THEY had the right of things and Giffen was wrong, and Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman are the centerpiece of the League instead of Johnny-Come-Lately posers."

An opportunity that Waid CHOSE not to take.

Continuity is the responsible respect for the past. Choosing destructive concepts like Giffen's over the JLA's true, established history is the opposite of continuity, just like antimatter is the opposite of normal matter. It's "anti-continuity."

[Paul Newell]

That's where we come into our old friend continuity and editorial. There was a separate continuity set up Post-Crisis that was editorially dictated that the writers had to follow. The Silver Age had nothing to do with it. There was a mandate by editorial that the Pre-Crisis history no longer existed and that you had to stick to the new origins. This restriction has only been loosened in the last couple of years.

So its an opportunity that Waid had no choice in and can hardly be blamed.

Besides Waid later on set up that Superman and Batman, at least, were members earlier than previously mandated. He did this in the Silver Age Secret Origins and Files. This was expanded upon later in the Incarnations mini.

[JulianPerez]

That's where we come into our old friend continuity and editorial. There was a separate continuity set up Post-Crisis that was editorially dictated that the writers had to follow. The Silver Age had nothing to do with it. There was a mandate by editorial that the Pre-Crisis history no longer existed and that you had to stick to the new origins. This restriction has only been loosened in the last couple of years.

So its an opportunity that Waid had no choice in and can hardly be blamed.

Besides Waid later on set up that Superman and Batman, at least, were members earlier than previously mandated. He did this in the Silver Age Secret Origins and Files. This was expanded upon later in the Incarnations mini.

Interesting point. Never underestimate the shortsightedness of people in charge. The appalling waste that is just balling up and chucking away some of the greatest stories ever written in comics form is one that still stings to this day.

Even if it wasn't Mark Waid's fault, it was still a bad idea.

[Mister Intensity]

One of the problems with DC in the last twenty years or so is that no one could keep Post-Crisis continuity straight. If you ask anyone in DC how Post-Crisis continuity jibed with the Silver Age, you couldn't get a coherent answer. What parts of the Silver Age took place, what parts didn't? When did Wonder Woman come to Man's World? Was Superman a honorary or full-time member of the JL of A? Was Batman ever a member of the JL of A? Ask each editor at DC those questions and you will get different answers. Since no one really kept track of "official" DC History, a lot of continuity errors tend to slip through. Which history should a writer follow, the original Silver Age history or the modern "official" history, where the published Silver Age version of may or may not have taken place? When the "official" history is never consistent then you might as well make it up since no one knows what's "official" and it probably will be changed tomorrow anyway.

Mister Intensity

[Paul Newell]

Interesting point. Never underestimate the shortsightedness of people in charge. The appalling waste that is just balling up and chucking away some of the greatest stories ever written in comics form is one that still stings to this day.

Even if it wasn't Mark Waid's fault, it was still a bad idea.
And they can be for the most idiotic reasons. I still rankle at Superman editorial telling Giffen, after the first issue of Legion of Super-Heroes v4 that he couldn't reference Superboy, so he had to quickly insert the Mon-El/Time Trapper story that rewrote history....Only to have 'em realise that it now invalidated the new Matrix/Supergirl's story and he had to fix it fast.

I can see your point, though I did find it interesting having Black Canary as a founding member. Though not much was done with it.

[Bob Violence]

They were thinking they had to use the Post-Crisis origin, written by Keith Giffen in the 80's? The whole story follows on from Secret Origins #32.

It wasn't Mark Waids idea, but established continuity at the time.
I didn't mean, "Mark Waid What were you thinking?" but more like "DC editorial WWYT?" Waid did a decent enough job, but clearly the reason behind it wasn't to tell a good story but to patch up continuity.
It's as if John Grisham had to put out another book to explain his current one.
I usually don't have a problem with screwed up continuity, I know I'm reading comic books and things change over time, but Year One was throwing all the little inconsistencies that I ignore while enjoying a JLA story in my face.

[Bored at 3:00AM]

They were thinking they had to use the Post-Crisis origin, written by Keith Giffen in the 80's? The whole story follows on from Secret Origins #32.

It wasn't MArk Waids idea, but established continuity at the time.

Nobody's saying it was Waid's idea, at least I'm not, I'm saying that the continuity changes prevented Waid from telling the story he wanted to tell and the story suffered as a result. Waid himself has said as much.

[Shellhead]

Mark Waid has many strengths as a writer, but characterization is not one of them.

I strongly disagree with this statement.

How can you be so familiar with silver age DC continuity, and yet be so blind to the vast absence of characterization back then? Gardner Fox had some great ideas, but almost none of them involved actual character development. He may have been capable of that kind of writing, but it wasn't required, given that the fanbase was mostly kids back then.

You want characterization? Waid wrote Green Lantern as bold, confident, and a little reckless. He wrote Flash as a nice guy who has trouble choosing between his girlfriend and a sexy teammate. He shows Black Canary as dedicated to the legacy of the JSA and yet struggling to become independent of her mother. And he even showed some interesting insight to Aquaman as an outsider. You did give credit for how well Waid wrote the Martian Manhunter. Now look back at the silver age JLA, and you won't find any significant difference in personality between any of these heroes.

[JulianPerez]

I strongly disagree with this statement.

How can you be so familiar with silver age DC continuity, and yet be so blind to the vast absence of characterization back then? Gardner Fox had some great ideas, but almost none of them involved actual character development. He may have been capable of that kind of writing, but it wasn't required, given that the fanbase was mostly kids back then.

It is true that the DC Heroes of the Silver Age had more or less the same patriarchial, "serve and protect" values and an interchangeable ultra-confident, incorruptible, resourceful personality. This can be forgiven because the emphasis in those stories was on PLOT, not on CHARACTERIZATION.

You are correct that the great innovation in superhero comics that Stan Lee added, that stories are more interesting if personalities are given to heroes and villains, would have to wait until the 1970s to really take effect at DC. However, being critical of the Silver Age stories for their lack of FANTASTIC FOUR-esque character idiosyncracies is begging the question and not being fair to the kinds of stories that Fox with his JUSTICE LEAGUE was trying to tell. In the words of Roger Ebert, "kicking a dog because it can't do calculus."

To be fair to the Silver Age writers, characterization was not TOTALLY absent, they merely used subtlety and had a light touch with it. Green Lantern, for instance, first shows up in SHOWCASE #22 (1959) and how does SHOWCASE #23 start out? With Green Lantern, now famous, being seen on dates with various gorgeous girls. This shows - by implication - something about the sort of guy Hal Jordan is.

On a related note, one fun game to play is "Which DC Hero was the first to have a definite personality?"

I've argued that it was the Jim Shooter-penned Karate Kid and Projectra. Karate Kid alternated between being a tough guy and a sensitive guy into art and flower arranging, whereas Projectra was overly concerned with what people thought of her; for instance, in one story where she takes the Legion to her home planet (ADVENTURE COMICS #362, 1969), she tells a little white lie to her parents and says they are all "nobility" from distant worlds.

You want characterization? Waid wrote Green Lantern as bold, confident, and a little reckless.

All I can say about Waid is, at least he didn't pull his characterizations out of nowhere (except one hilarious example, which I'll get to later). Green Lantern's supreme confidence is a natural extension of what it is we already KNOW about him, which is that he is utterly fearless, has something of a daredevil streak, and is totally honest.

He wrote Flash as a nice guy who has trouble choosing between his girlfriend and a sexy teammate.

Again, another case of Waid's characterizations, despite whatever we might say, originating in what came before. Gil Kane used to draw Wally West with bow ties. What kind of guy wears bow ties, EVEN in 1958? Not guys that were whizzes with the ladies.

Now this subplot on the other hand, I found an overly histrionic page killer. There was never any doubt how it was going to be resolved, none of the characters express real passion and heat, and it's hard to imagine something like this weighting on the mind of the Flash at all.

It ought to be noted that very little of the supporting cast of the characters appear in the miniseries, except for Pieface, Carol, Iris West, and Golden Age Black Canary (whose appearance is an extended cameo). In addition to the absence of the aforementioned Zoot, one wonders where Vulko, Aquaman's chief scientist and lifelong ally, is. What about Green Lantern's two brothers and maybe Tomar-Re?

And he even showed some interesting insight to Aquaman as an outsider.

"Angry" Aquaman brings a smile to my face because of how amusingly inappropriate a personality transplant it is. Is this the same wholesome, handsome blonde guy with a walrus best friend that cheerfully had swordfish jump and chop guns in half, and who says stuff like "the octopus is the only guy I KNOW that can throw an uppercut and a roundhouse at the SAME TIME!"

[Sk8maven]

"Angry" Aquaman brings a smile to my face because of how amusingly inappropriate a personality transplant it is. Is this the same wholesome, handsome blonde guy with a walrus best friend that cheerfully had swordfish jump and chop guns in half, and who says stuff like "the octopus is the only guy I KNOW that can throw an uppercut and a roundhouse at the SAME TIME!"Nope, it's Marvel's Namor in drag. :D

I know Waid thought he was being so funny and so clever with that "bulb wrench" gag - but there really is a gizmo that's used to change ceiling light bulbs. I just don't think they call it a "bulb wrench". :cool:

Maven

[Paul Newell]

I didn't mean, "Mark Waid What were you thinking?" but more like "DC editorial WWYT?"
The Mark Waid comment was aimed more at Julian rather than you, sorry. I got the messages mixed.
Waid did a decent enough job, but clearly the reason behind it wasn't to tell a good story but to patch up continuity.
It's as if John Grisham had to put out another book to explain his current one.
I don't see this one at all however. What exactly did JLA:Year One patch up? The mini expanded on concepts, sure, but all of it had already been established by other stories previously.