Final Crisis #3 Spoilers!!!

[Magneto Rocks]

I simply can't agree. While I get what Grant was TRYING to do in Final Crisis 1 with this, it completely fell flat for me. Maybe it's because everyone knew it was coming but I wasn't left going "HOLY CRAP he couldn't even fight back!" I was left completely and totally unimpressed. I think there's a balance between an issue spent on it and a bit of a page. Now please, I understand absolutely what he was doing with the shock of it and the Manhunter having no chance to fight back... I just don't think it worked. So I for one appreciated Requiem.

[Paul McEnery]

It probably won't make a whole lot of sense outside of the context of my thematic synopsis of FC 1, so here's the link:

http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showpost.php?p=7348130&postcount=396

And here's the passage:

And here we have Libra picking up the Metron motif. He's in the chair. He's the balance. He's offering knowledge/death. Anthro's scene was in a dawn light, we've now progressed to utter darkness within an abandoned theater (theater of consciousness? I don't think that's too much of a stretch). Libra offers the heart's desire in return for participation -- which we see later is very much the Devil's bargain.

And now we get that desire articulated -- which sounds like mere conversation -- and then delivered instantly. All the complaints about Martian Manhunter's inglorious death are misplaced -- this is not his story, he's just an incidental element to what the Human Flame wants which is an incidental detail in what Libra can deliver.

We might also pause to note the pornographic arousal of other flamey guy -- and the pursed lips on both Luthor and Savage, the reaching suprise of Ocean Master, the fannish enthusiasm of Human Flame. I've already written at length about how the symbol of the death is a direct reversal of the classic Michael/Satan image, and how this symbol completely sums up this passage.

The POV flinches, and switches quickly to a metaphorical disastrous death-wound, which flinches out still further to a dark scene in a bar -- we'll pick up this motif at the beginning of FC2 -- and a cut to the Dark Side Club. Note liberty in the background -- she's lit. First panel FC3, she's dark. We follow Turpin's narrative vector inside to face what we're really afraid of, and look Darkseid in the eye and be shown the aborted future. "Show him what you've learned about anti-life."

[Harding Prime]

luckily it doesn't affect what happens in the main book in the slightest. i just found it unnecessary and sortof offensive in the way dc felt they might have to placate fans and let everyone have their cake and eat it too. that said, the writing wasn't bad.

First you blame the DC for milking the death, then you blame the fans for wanting more of a beloved character. All and all, with that reasoning, it just seems like something had to be done for both sides. Both parties win, and those that don't find it necessary, don't have to buy it, and they win to, becuase it doesn't effect their story of their wallet.

[Paul McEnery]

First you blame the DC for milking the death, then you blame the fans for wanting more of a beloved character. All and all, with that reasoning, it just seems like something had to be done for both sides. Both parties win, and those that don't find it necessary, don't have to buy it, and they win to, becuase it doesn't effect their story of their wallet.

What you're missing is that these two things are not contraditory; they're part and parcel of the parasitic relationship between corporate culture and the conditioned consumer.

[Harding Prime]

What you're missing is that these two things are not contraditory; they're part and parcel of the parasitic relationship between corporate culture and the conditioned consumer.

Supply and Demand my friend...Supply and Demand.

[dotdotdot]

Supply and Demand my friend...Supply and Demand.

which doesn't have a great track record of producing substantial art

[Paul McEnery]

Supply and Demand my friend...Supply and Demand.

Funny you should say that, because the track record of consumer capitalism is to create a need and then addict the consumers to it, of which cigarettes are the obvious example.

[Harding Prime]

Funny you should say that, because the track record of consumer capitalism is to create a need and then addict the consumers to it, of which cigarettes are the obvious example.

I don't know why you would say that, but okay...

The company supplied the death of an iconic character in a short version for shock and awe. The buyers demanded more for the fallen hero...

[Spiffy]

I don't think it affects what happened in the main book in the slightest.

It's an expansion of a scene that was so short that it had no resonance with me, even if that was the point but this is a case where you can have it both ways. If you didn't like the "sappy stuff" in Requiem then just stick to FC, if you want to see more about MM before and after his death then you can just buy Requiem. I have to agree with Harding Prime, I liked it.

Hell I actually thought that Requiem had a better emotional impact that the entirety of that first issue.
Obviously you are coming into this thread late. Paul and a few others have been trying to convince the rest of us that the artistic merit of Final Crisis is that its lack of emotional impact IS the big statement--that its an artistic choice. And that anything that tries to add emotional impact is a betrayal of that.

Oh, also that we are easily manipulated tools of the establishment if we think otherwise.

[dotdotdot]

I don't know why you would say that, but okay...

The company supplied the death of an iconic character in a short version for shock and awe. The buyers demanded more for the fallen hero...

this ignores the purpose of the death and we're back at this "kill a character for shock" jargon. it's the buyers demand that seems misplaced, but kudos to dc for putting out a decent book, even though i found it unnecessary and its presence a bit offensive.
oh man i can't stand the proliferation of the phrase "shock and awe" where it doesn't belong. just in case anyone was curious about my pet peeves.

[Paul McEnery]

Obviously you are coming into this thread late. Paul and a few others have been trying to convince the rest of us that the artistic merit of Final Crisis is that its lack of emotional impact IS the big statement--that its an artistic choice. And that anything that tries to add emotional impact is a betrayal of that.

Oh, also that we are easily manipulated tools of the establishment if we think otherwise.

Not so much. Certainly the lack of emotional engagement with the protagonists is deliberate, and that steers us to the fact that the actual protagonist is the universe itself; and once read from that angle, the book is plenty exciting and emotional -- albeit most of the emotions so far have been shock, dread, and terror.

http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showpost.php?p=7359934&postcount=588

[Jeff F]

right and we've thoroughly discounted that already. or at least explained why and how it succeeded in its intended effect. i'm sure not everyone agrees, but the way it was dealt with was obviously supposed to be jarring and requiem gives you the antithesis of this, a monumental heroic sendoff issue. just cheesy.

I wouldn't describe the death of Martian Manhunter as jarring or brutal.

I would describe it as casual.

I think my descriptor underlines the point of Final Crisis much better than yours, but I'm sure your mileage varies.

[dotdotdot]

Not so much. Certainly the lack of emotional engagement with the protagonists is deliberate, and that steers us to the fact that the actual protagonist is the universe itself; and once read from that angle, the book is plenty exciting and emotional -- albeit most of the emotions so far have been shock, dread, and terror.

http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showpost.php?p=7359934&postcount=588

right, the very polarizing nature of the conversation and the frustration of many readers is a direct indicator of the emotional impact, one that does not need additional panel time to have its intended effect. it's just difficult for many to see this sort of brutal abuse of a character as a good thing. it's not as if proponents of this death scene like MM any less. The full page on Mars with its awareness of superhero death/resurrection conventions (as well as the distance between the viewer, the panel, (the exiled monitor's screen of the mind's eye in the McLuhan sense (sp?)), and the television screen where green arrow vows revenge.....these bits all very succinctly manage to do the job required of killing someone of MM's stature. The issue just doesn't reveal any neglect towards these actions, but it also doesn't stop to allow the fans to bring their grieving process or their shock, or expectations, into wasted panels. In a sense the amount of things that have to happen in the white space between panels, in the reader's imagination, after and between readings, plays into the idea that this world can act as a sentient being, or at lest as something that intervenes in a gnostic sense, rising out of the panels into daily life.

[dotdotdot]

I wouldn't describe the death of Martian Manhunter as jarring or brutal.

I would describe it as casual.

I think my descriptor underlines the point of Final Crisis much better than yours, but I'm sure your mileage varies.

that's a good point. it's the brutality of doing something so casually. this is definitely what i'm trying to express. the sort of disgust at the human flame taking video with his cellphone. etc.

[Paul McEnery]

right, the very polarizing nature of the conversation and the frustration of many readers is a direct indicator of the emotional impact, one that does not need additional panel time to have its intended effect. it's just difficult for many to see this sort of brutal abuse of a character as a good thing. it's not as if proponents of this death scene like MM any less. The full page on Mars with its awareness of superhero death/resurrection conventions (as well as the distance between the viewer, the panel, (the exiled monitor's screen of the mind's eye in the McLuhan sense (sp?)), and the television screen where green arrow vows revenge.....these bits all very succinctly manage to do the job required of killing someone of MM's stature. The issue just doesn't reveal any neglect towards these actions, but it also doesn't stop to allow the fans to bring their grieving process or their shock, or expectations, into wasted panels. In a sense the amount of things that have to happen in the white space between panels, in the reader's imagination, after and between readings, plays into the idea that this world can act as a sentient being, or at lest as something that intervenes in a gnostic sense, rising out of the panels into daily life.

I think the Green Arrow blurt, and the funeral scene, are intended at one level to point to the utter fatuity of the emotional self-indulgence surrounding the death of a character.

[dotdotdot]

I think the Green Arrow blurt, and the funeral scene, are intended at one level to point to the utter fatuity of the emotional self-indulgence surrounding the death of a character.

well i can go along with that.

[Paul McEnery]

well i can go along with that.

I think the first time I nearly barfed just at the title of a book, it was "Funeral for a Friend."

I mean, think about it. How many times do people go to a funeral for someone they don't know?

[dotdotdot]

I think the first time I nearly barfed just at the title of a book, it was "Funeral for a Friend."

I mean, think about it. How many times do people go to a funeral for someone they don't know?

let's not speak of that abysmal story. it's funny that so many accuse grant of intellectual wankery, but these sendoff specials are the most masturbatory activites i can imagine in comics, besides maybe darker image.

[Paul McEnery]

let's not speak of that abysmal story. it's funny that so many accuse grant of intellectual wankery, but these sendoff specials are the most masturbatory activites i can imagine in comics, besides maybe darker image.

Although this is a much more subtle spoof of that nonsense than, say, the red herring funeral for Booster Gold. That was a hoot.

[dotdotdot]

Although this is a much more subtle spoof of that nonsense than, say, the red herring funeral for Booster Gold. That was a hoot.

im less familiar with that, but i was thinking about the goofy metamorpho funeral in jla. that had an almost eerie vibe to it, too, as whimsical as it was.

[dotdotdot]

i just now read the mindlessones post and the comments and got to this:

"“Our customers expect burgers with fries. Bizarre, unsettling questions? No.”

It’s right there"

and started shaking my head. hot damn, grant.

[Paul McEnery]

i just now read the mindlessones post and the comments and got to this:

"“Our customers expect burgers with fries. Bizarre, unsettling questions? No.”

It’s right there"

and started shaking my head. hot damn, grant.

Madness.
...

[Harding Prime]

this ignores the purpose of the death and we're back at this "kill a character for shock" jargon. it's the buyers demand that seems misplaced, but kudos to dc for putting out a decent book, even though i found it unnecessary and its presence a bit offensive.
oh man i can't stand the proliferation of the phrase "shock and awe" where it doesn't belong. just in case anyone was curious about my pet peeves.

It doesn't ignore the purpose of the death if you don't pick it up. It doesn't have to distort your view at all, because it doesn't have to be involved in the story for you to continue with it. And that is the beauty of it, and it was very well written to boot.

[Jeff F]

I don't see what's wrong with the emotional pandering, as it's being described as.

Requim was a fine story, maybe a little long in the tooth, but I read Ostrander's series, so a lot of it was Flashback for me. It dealt with the death of a much beloved super hero, and blah blah blah.

It had nothing to do with Final Crisis. It picked up a smidge from it, but thematically, it had nothing to do with Final Crisis.

I don't see anything wrong with the death as portrayed in Final Crisis. It fits the tone of the story well, and gets across the point that Grant hammered in over the first three issues.

Why people are choosing to read them as parts of the same whole I understand, but it's really the wrong way to look at them, I think.

[Harding Prime]

I don't see what's wrong with the emotional pandering, as it's being described as.

Requim was a fine story, maybe a little long in the tooth, but I read Ostrander's series, so a lot of it was Flashback for me. It dealt with the death of a much beloved super hero, and blah blah blah.

It had nothing to do with Final Crisis. It picked up a smidge from it, but thematically, it had nothing to do with Final Crisis.

I don't see anything wrong with the death as portrayed in Final Crisis. It fits the tone of the story well, and gets across the point that Grant hammered in over the first three issues.

Why people are choosing to read them as parts of the same whole I understand, but it's really the wrong way to look at them, I think.

That is what I have been trying to say, you don't need to incorporate it and it won't hurt the story one iota. If you want to pay homage to great character, then there it is. Everyone can be happy and there really is no need to argue about it. This is no of the few things DC has done right.

[Spiffy]

How many times do people go to a funeral for someone they don't know?
For me, the big problem was that we were being sold a "special" just to see Martian Manhunter's little ceremony. That stole away any real impact it might have had on me.

Within the context of a story, in the right place, I think a funeral scene can be effective. In this case it was little but a floating dollar sign (or for some a pound okay?). It was OBVIOUS. There was no context, no subtlety, no reprieve from the crass emotionalism.

I can accept emotionalism if I think its been fairly earned. Its a subjective judgment to be sure, but I've read plenty of books, seen plenty of movies, where I've been unashamed of a tear.

But also plenty where I've been disgusted with the writers and producers, or even moreso myself if I gave in, to cheap, crass manipulation.

The tear should never be the point of a story. If it is, its a bad story. A fairly earned tear is one that happens in a story that gives you as much to think about as it does to feel. This Requiem special didn't give anyone ANYTHING to think about, and it selfishly chewed up a few extra consumer dollars to boot.

[Paul McEnery]

For me, the big problem was that we were being sold a "special" just to see Martian Manhunter's little ceremony. That stole away any real impact it might have had on me.

Within the context of a story, in the right place, I think a funeral scene can be effective. In this case it was little but a floating dollar sign (or for some a pound okay?). It was OBVIOUS. There was no context, no subtlety, no reprieve from the crass emotionalism.

I can accept emotionalism if I think its been fairly earned. Its a subjective judgment to be sure, but I've read plenty of books, seen plenty of movies, where I've been unashamed of a tear.

But also plenty where I've been disgusted with the writers and producers, or even moreso myself if I gave in, to cheap, crass manipulation.

The tear should never be the point of a story. If it is, its a bad story. A fairly earned tear is one that happens in a story that gives you as much to think about as it does to feel. This Requiem special didn't give anyone ANYTHING to think about, and it selfishly chewed up a few extra consumer dollars to boot.

To be fair, it's not like we weren't told in advance it was going to be "a very special episode".

Why the hell does TV do "very special episodes", anyway?

[Spiffy]

To be fair, it's not like we weren't told in advance it was going to be "a very special episode".

Why the hell does TV do "very special episodes", anyway?
Very special episodes can go to hell.

And the writers of them burn in it!

[dotdotdot]

That is what I have been trying to say, you don't need to incorporate it and it won't hurt the story one iota. If you want to pay homage to great character, then there it is. Everyone can be happy and there really is no need to argue about it. This is no of the few things DC has done right.

lol but we can still discuss the rights and wrongs and motivations behind such an issue. it's not as if i purchased it. i'm not bitter about an issue i paid money for.

[Harding Prime]

lol but we can still discuss the rights and wrongs and motivations behind such an issue. it's not as if i purchased it. i'm not bitter about an issue i paid money for.

I obviously don't mind talking about it, but at the end of the day, this issue didn't hurt the story and answered fans that wanted a little more for MM.

[Jack Zodiac]

I think the first time I nearly barfed just at the title of a book, it was "Funeral for a Friend."

I mean, think about it. How many times do people go to a funeral for someone they don't know?

Lame? Sure. But without it, we wouldn't have had the amazing Deadpool arc, "Funeral for a Freak."

Although this is a much more subtle spoof of that nonsense than, say, the red herring funeral for Booster Gold. That was a hoot.

Only 'cause Beefeater and Mind Grabber Man were there.

im less familiar with that, but i was thinking about the goofy metamorpho funeral in jla. that had an almost eerie vibe to it, too, as whimsical as it was.

The one Morrison wrote? Where nobody shows up but Superman and Java? That was pretty funny. "It's so sad. So many people came to my funeral."

[lawman]

But the blow wasn't "brutal." It was "meh." One of the biggest complaints about FC #1 was that J'onn's death-cameo really had no resonance at all, of any kind.right and we've thoroughly discounted that already. or at least explained why and how it succeeded in its intended effect...
Wow. You just can't come to terms with the idea that anyone's allowed to disagree with you, can you? Obviously a lot of people did, in this case, and you can't just "discount" their reactions as somehow "wrong." Concept: if you have to explain after the fact why part of a story "succeeded in its intended effect," that pretty much admits that it didn't at the time of reading.

I read an interesting review (http://www.ifanboy.com/content/potw/08_06_2008_-_Final_Crisis__3) of FC #3 today on the iFanboy site. The author has a few criticisms but is by and large very favorable, most notably with this statement: Final Crisis is a book dripping with doom and that packs a powerful emotional wallop. It feels epic. It feels like important things are happening, and will happen. It feels like there will be consequences (as much as there ever are in DC and Marvel books). Final Crisis feels like a big event should.
Now, I personally don't agree with that. On the comments thread that follows, some people do and some don't. But the pleasant thing about it is that although opinions differ, neither the author nor the commenters project the attitude that the book is some kind of litmus test for readers, that unless you agree with them about liking what Grant is doing and how he's doing it you're somehow a lesser human being.

What is it about you and the other defenders of FC on these boards that you can't let go of that attitude? That you object even to the existence of a book (Requiem) that appeals to tastes different from yours?

[lawman]

In a sense the amount of things that have to happen in the white space between panels, in the reader's imagination, after and between readings, plays into the idea that this world can act as a sentient being, or at lest as something that intervenes in a gnostic sense, rising out of the panels into daily life.
Or, perhaps, that Grant is trying to tell too large a story in too small a space. He's skimming over so many events and points of view that he doesn't provide a sufficiently sharp focus on any of them. Yes, I understand that in any comic what a reader brings "between" panels is important -- I've read Understanding Comics, yadda yadda yadda. Nevertheless, it's possible to overdo that, and leave entirely too much in the "white space." I think that may be part of the problem here, for a lot of readers.

[dotdotdot]

Wow. You just can't come to terms with the idea that anyone's allowed to disagree with you, can you? Obviously a lot of people did, in this case, and you can't just "discount" their reactions as somehow "wrong." Concept: if you have to explain after the fact why part of a story "succeeded in its intended effect," that pretty much admits that it didn't at the time of reading.

I read an interesting review (http://www.ifanboy.com/content/potw/08_06_2008_-_Final_Crisis__3) of FC #3 today on the iFanboy site. The author has a few criticisms but is by and large very favorable, most notably with this statement:
Now, I personally don't agree with that. On the comments thread that follows, some people do and some don't. But the pleasant thing about it is that although opinions differ, neither the author nor the commenters project the attitude that the book is some kind of litmus test for readers, that unless you agree with them about liking what Grant is doing and how he's doing it you're somehow a lesser human being.

What is it about you and the other defenders of FC on these boards that you can't let go of that attitude? That you object even to the existence of a book (Requiem) that appeals to tastes different from yours?

look this is a situation where one of us isn't bothering to see the other point of view. i completely understand the complaints, but when they occur and it's clear that the critic hasn't bothered to take into account the writer's intentions and produced any argument considered how well they did or didn't succeed, then they haven't really reckoned with the opposing argument. it's perfectly clear why the scene has caused so much trouble, but there aren't in every argument two equally valid viewpoints, and we need to come to terms with that. it allows every argument to become completely muddled and unresolved. so i don't see where you can find a problem with the qualifier i used following that statement about the attempts in this thread to discount that particular interpretation. it keeps getting brought up as though no progress has been made. i think admitting that requiem, while seeming completely contrived, stage-managed, managed to be a decently written issue, and i can see why it is likeable, anyway i think admitting this is plenty of a concession.

while everything is subjective, objectivity is present in each case too. they aren't opposites.

[dotdotdot]

Or, perhaps, that Grant is trying to tell too large a story in too small a space. He's skimming over so many events and points of view that he doesn't provide a sufficiently sharp focus on any of them. Yes, I understand that in any comic what a reader brings "between" panels is important -- I've read Understanding Comics, yadda yadda yadda. Nevertheless, it's possible to overdo that, and leave entirely too much in the "white space." I think that may be part of the problem here, for a lot of readers.

oh absolutely, perhaps. but it puts the reader in a position to keep up. the burden seems to be on you, on us. suck it up! do some work! etc.
i haven't read understanding comics btw, but i have heard about a supposed pentagon study about the most effective means by which the brain processes information - text integrated into still images. something to this effect.
things like "sufficiently sharp focus" also seem to relate to the speed at which you read an issue. detractors also have missed lots of details in the artwork (though thankfully some have pointed out a few blunders, too) which confirms the theory that slowing down and reading more than once are potential useful strategies. if i hear "but i shouldn't have to....! whatever" i just end up thinking, well, how lazy. this sort of person wouldn't be bothering to argue about an issue days later, for one.

[lawman]

look this is a situation where one of us isn't bothering to see the other point of view. i completely understand the complaints, but when they occur and it's clear that the critic hasn't bothered to take into account the writer's intentions and produced any argument considered how well they did or didn't succeed, then they haven't really reckoned with the opposing argument.
You must be thinking of someone other than me. I've read what Grant has to say about his intentions with this book, and a lot of it sounds terrific, but what's on the page just hasn't been living up to the ideas he's talked about, in ways I've described at length. I've also read what some people on this board think Grant's intentions are, but that's another matter; if I haven't bothered to dissect those opinions in detail it's because they mostly come across to me as a pretentious load of bollocks.

(At any rate, since when are an author's intentions the only valid grounds on which to criticize a work? You seem smart enough to know more about critical theory than would allow you to make such a claim.)

there aren't in every argument two equally valid viewpoints, and we need to come to terms with that.
We're arguing about a friggin' work of fiction here. There are way more than just two valid viewpoints in the mix, and you need to come to terms with that. There is no "objective" truth to be determined, nor anyone in a position to determine it.

oh absolutely, perhaps. but it puts the reader in a position to keep up. the burden seems to be on you, on us. suck it up! do some work! etc.
Screw that. As I've said repeatedly now, I'm more than willing to put in that kind of effort if and only if the work I'm reading rewards it. This one doesn't. I'm not about to put in more effort than Grant himself appears to have bothered with.

Just for example, to borrow from a critic (http://www.ifanboy.com/content/potw/08_06_2008_-_Final_Crisis__3#70171) in that other discussion I mentioned:
I really don't understand what this power is that Grant Morrison has over the geek comic buying public. He writes stuff that doesn't make sense with no explanation as to how it came about. When other writers do that its called "bad writing". When he does it, it gets acknowledged as not making sense but somehow its cool.

"Its a little known fact that death can't go faster than the speed of light..." What the hell is that? A little known fact of the DC Universe that he just made up that doesn't make any sense...

How is Superman keeping Lois' heart going with his heat vision? How exactly is that supposed to work? Besides explaining that Superman has been M.I.A, that makes no sense...

Oh yeah, and a spam virus that ends the world? Kind of like interfacing your laptop with an alien space ship. Give me a break.
Now, this guy is a little caustic, but his points are valid. Grant's taking one helluva lot of shortcuts here, story beats that are just plain goofy or illogical (I think I already mentioned the paper draft notices, too), and expecting readers to just swallow it all and keep going. It's sloppy writing.

[lawman]

Yeah, as I look around at other sites I realize that maybe my mistake here is that I've been just too darn nice about FC, too diplomatic, too evenhanded. If you Morrison defenders really want to take a crack at someone seriously attacking the book, take a look at what this guy has to say (http://www.doomkopf.com/2008/08/09/book-of-doom-final-crisis-3/#more-1125) (emph. mine):
With a lot of comics, you read them once and then you’re done. But with Final Crisis, I’ve read each of these issues several times, trying to figure out — am I missing something? Or is this really as awful as it seems?

...Jay explains the situation as follows — he and Wally saw a window in time open up, heard the command to “Run,” and so they immediately started running alongside Barry. Barry was apparently chasing the bullet that went backwards through time, trying to stop it, but it was too late. The Black Racer was also following the bullet, but it looks like he was just there to claim Orion when Orion bought it (in the revised Final Crisis version of Orion’s death — not the Death of the New Gods version or the Countdown version, both of which also happened in 2008).

Upon failing to catch that magic bullet, the three Flashes decided to turn around and run back to the future, and that’s when Jay pooped out. He made it back to the present in order to tell his story, but for some reason completely beyond my understanding, Wally and Barry decided to keep running until 3 weeks from now.

Meanwhile, Libra was apparently given the keys to the stupid Super Friends hideout that the bad guys all use now. He slams a new anti-life helmet on the Human Flame’s head, apparently revealing that this slow-motion charade to gradually woo the Flame into Libra’s command was really only just to get that helmet on his head. Considering Libra was able to get the Martian Manhunter there in the boardroom for an assassination and wipe out the top floors of the Daily Planet, one wonders why he did the slow-burn wine-and-dine song-and-dance with The Human Flame if he just needed the loser to put on a new hat.

Now I realize Lex Luthor is in a tough spot, but really, if a guy walked up to me after concluding his weeks-long project to get the Human Flame to try on a new hat and then said “Renounce science, swear an oath on the Bible of Crime and pledge your service to the Master of All Evil,” I think I might be tempted to laugh. ...

All these other heroes are answering the call — which apparently gets sent by snail-mail, since it’s so urgent, as they’re all holding a piece of paper. (Green Arrow acknowledges he does have a convenient JLA signal device, which they didn’t bother to use.)

I don’t read Supergirl, but it looks as if her hobby is to draw pictures of herself. Green Arrow and Black Canary are half undressed, since they’re liberals and liberals just have sleazy sex all the time.

And then poof — in what was probably supposed to be a great, dramatic moment, all the heroes have united to … figure out who killed Orion? Rescue the peacefully imprisoned Hal Jordan? Fight the evil gods that aren’t attacking? Hmm.

Meanwhile, the few people who actually seem to get to do things and be involved in action (a.k.a. “Characters Grant Morrison created”) are back in Japan in a runway battle with people wearing Anti-Life helmets. They fly away in the Super Young Team’s flying car and I don’t even want to think about this subplot anymore. ...

A stupid fight between Wonder Woman and the now leather-clad / head-shaven Mary Marvel ensues, so that Wonder Woman could become ” a disease carrier,” the significance of which escapes me, because then a page later we learn that Mokkari has “sent an email to every single address on the planet earth.”

Apparently, this is a really bad email, because it opens itself! And it has a dangerous attachment! I hope to God that all the geeks who have ragged on Secret Invasion for Bendis’ supposed lack of understanding of how technology works will be equally as vicious with this idea that one person is going to have an email address list called “Everyone,” and that by sending this email to everyone, something bad will automatically happen. ...

There’s no way around it — Final Crisis is really bad. I can’t believe how bad it is. On one hand, it’s written cryptically enough and with enough intertwining plot points that it begs you to think, but then it’s so riddled with logic holes and nonsense that it punishes you for thinking. I keep re-reading it, struggling to accept that it’s really as bad as it seems, but then I just keep hating it more and more each time.
I think that last, bolded point sums things up painfully accurately.

[Paul McEnery]

What is it about you and the other defenders of FC on these boards that you can't let go of that attitude? That you object even to the existence of a book (Requiem) that appeals to tastes different from yours?

The interesting question is why there's a need to attack Final Crisis; and why there's always a need to attack Grant; and why there's always a need to attack the people who enjoy his work. Because all of that existed before the book even came out.

It's utterly disingenuous to claim that the boot is on the other foot. It simply isn't.

It's also disingenuous to ask why people object to Requiem's existence -- or DONG or Countdown's existence, which amounts to the same thing. The facts are these:

DC hired Grant to refurbish a large number of its unused properties. That was the thinking behind 52 and Seven Soldiers. This was well-publicised, as was the hiring of Michael Moorcock to write a multiverse bible for the entire line. Grant not only wrote new ideas for the Seven Soldiers and 52, and polished up other characters like The Atom, he also created a large number of completely new characters. This was his brief, he more than fulfilled it, and DC certainly dined out well on it, even though it failed to capitalize fully on the properties that had been redeveloped -- well, to be accurate, actively threw away the opportunities in many cases, exploiting them in a crass fashion if at all (with the honourable exception of Gail Simone's Atom).

So there's that. The last piece of the puzzle has been well-publicised for years now, that Grant was going to write a story that showed the DC Universe as a living entity in itself -- something that we've already seen in the DC/Marvel crossover, and which Grant wanted to explore. Again, it was well-publicized that Grant's approach was going to be to treat DC's protagonists as organelles of the universe, rather as he wrote the characters of The Invisibles as t-cells in the body of that world.

Readers may recall that that world was finally revealed to be a single biomass entity growing in the fourth dimension and getting ready to be born into the fifth dimension (in your standard mystical 2012 singularity paradigm), at which point the protagonists would all realize their true place in the universe and no longer be trapped in egotistical alienation. The action of the plot begins as a dichotomous battle between two sides, but by the end is shown to be natural processes within the organism of biomass planet earth in it's birth process; and the job of our heroes was simply that of an immune system keeping things on track.

What was obvious during JLA was that Grant was playing out the same ideas he was using in his high art book in the low art book of the superhero comic, so as to reach two different audiences with the same ideas, or offer two different perspectives. Final Crisis is just as obviously the culmination of those ideas within the superhero world as the last volume of The Invisibles was the culmination of the ideas in the high art format.

Now, all of that is clear enough if you've been following the work at all, and you'd rather think that the publisher of the work might do such a thing.

But what is remarkable about this course of events is that, far from promoting and supporting a work that has been in the planning stages for years, by the star writer who's been integral to the revitalization of the superhero line no less, DC decided to crassly exploit the situation and actively sabotage Grant's work.

I can't think of a single instance in publishing history where a publisher has chosen to put out books that patently contradict and undermine their most high profile work by a their most high profile writer.

I mean, who does that? It's like paying your half-back to kick the goalkeeper in the nads just before the penalty shoot-out.

Forget the superhero market. I've never seen the like in the entire entertainment business.

[lawman]

The interesting question is why there's a need to attack Final Crisis; and why there's always a need to attack Grant; and why there's always a need to attack the people who enjoy his work. Because all of that existed before the book even came out.
"Nuh-uh, it's not my fault, he started it!" :rolleyes:

Seriously... just wow. Talk about a bunker mentality...

It's also disingenuous to ask why people object to Requiem's existence -- or DONG or Countdown's existence, which amounts to the same thing. The facts are these...

I can't think of a single instance in publishing history where a publisher has chosen to put out books that patently contradict and undermine their most high profile work by a their most high profile writer.

I mean, who does that? It's like paying your half-back to kick the goalkeeper in the nads just before the penalty shoot-out.

Forget the superhero market. I've never seen the like in the entire entertainment business.
Apples and oranges. While there were certainly justifiable complaints that Countdown and DONG didn't dovetail with FC as advertised (or with each other, for that matter), those were mostly aimed at Didio, not at Morrison. Far and away, the biggest criticisms of Countdown and DONG had to do with the simple fact that they were crap.

Requiem isn't crap. It's actually a very well-told story. Nor does it conflict with or otherwise undermine FC. It may be at odds with your interpretation of what FC is about, thematically, but that is not the same thing. The solution to that is simple: you don't have to read it. Telling other people they shouldn't be able to read it is absurdly arrogant.

(And hey, if you're going to use sports analogies, try to stick to sports that we in the U.S. actually care about!... :biggrin: )

Readers may recall that that world was finally revealed to be a single biomass entity growing in the fourth dimension and getting ready to be born into the fifth dimension (in your standard mystical 2012 singularity paradigm)...I believe I mentioned something earlier about "pretentious bollocks"?... :wink:

[Paul McEnery]

Nor does it conflict with or otherwise undermine FC.

Dies ingloriously without fighting back because sedated. Fights back and dies gloriously.

Nope, no contradiction there.

[Calybos]

The interesting question is why there's a need to attack Final Crisis; and why there's always a need to attack Grant; and why there's always a need to attack the people who enjoy his work. Because all of that existed before the book even came out.
Didn't like the story. Said so on a comics forum. That's hardly a vast conspiracy.

[Paul McEnery]

Didn't like the story. Said so on a comics forum. That's hardly a vast conspiracy.

And that, of course, means that nobody at all is being unreasoningly and pre-emptively hostile.

For that matter, one might question why you personally have felt the need to be repeatedly voice your thoughts on a book you don't like.

Though of course I look forward with bated breath to your future thoughts on the matter.

[Tom]

Okay, enough. This is a thread for the purpose of discussing issue #3 of FC. Any post that isn't specifically about issue #3 of FC will be deleted. If I have to repeatedly delete your posts, you're looking at a temp ban.

[General Grievous]

I just Noticed something cool about final crisis.

Each issue, the Red cover gets more red,

that's a nice nod to the bleed of the multiverse.

[Harding Prime]

I just Noticed something cool about final crisis.

Each issue, the Red cover gets more red,

that's a nice nod to the bleed of the multiverse.

I didn't get a chance to notice that because I got the Supergirl Cover. I usually stick to the same cover styles in Mini's like this, I.E. Civil War, the Variant's by Jim Lee on IC, but I just like Supergirl, :eek: , and thought it was Jones best art in the series yet.

Edit: That is cool though.

[Jack Tango]

Dies ingloriously without fighting back because sedated. Fights back and dies gloriously.

Nope, no contradiction there.

Stabbed in Final Crisis #1 and Final Crisis: Requiem, we see nothing beyond the impalement in former, and more details beyond the impalement in the latter.

Nope, no contradiction there. And no sarcasm here. :-)

[Calybos]

And that, of course, means that nobody at all is being unreasoningly and pre-emptively hostile.

For that matter, one might question why you personally have felt the need to be repeatedly voice your thoughts on a book you don't like.

Though of course I look forward with bated breath to your future thoughts on the matter.

As well you should! But really--three comments, in a 54-page thread? That doesn't seem particularly "obsessive" to me.

The story was dull. The path that the conversation has taken is converging on the inevitable "This is ART! Just because a lot of people don't like it doesn't mean it's bad... it means they're too unsophisticated to appreciate it!" Which is, really, nothing more than a way of avoiding saying "some like it, some don't."

No biggie. Just another comic book, folks.

[lawman]

...really, nothing more than a way of avoiding saying "some like it, some don't."

No biggie. Just another comic book, folks.
Yeah, that's pretty much it.

Time will tell, I suppose. In twenty years, will it be regarded as another Watchmen or even Crisis on Infinite Earths? Or will it be more like another Secret Wars or Millennium?

I know where I'd put my money, anyway.

[Jeff F]

Dies ingloriously without fighting back because sedated. Fights back and dies gloriously.

Nope, no contradiction there.

I forget the quote, and I forget who said it, so I'm going to paraphrase and not attribute (but I think it's Giffen):

"What are you talking about? My stories are right here, on my bookshelf."

[Harding Prime]

So it would seem to me that others firgured it out, but speaking of the art. The last page on this issue shows three Superheroes on animals, preparing to kill. Besides Wonder Woman, I couldn't make out the other two. Please tell me Pacheco is still suppose to be taking over?

[Paul McEnery]

So it would seem to me that others firgured it out, but speaking of the art. The last page on this issue shows three Superheroes on animals, preparing to kill. Besides Wonder Woman, I couldn't make out the other two. Please tell me Pacheco is still suppose to be taking over?

Well Catwoman was pretty obvious, I thought; the red hair means Batwoman; and I figure the one in the background for Giganta.

[Jeff F]

Well Catwoman was pretty obvious, I thought; the red hair means Batwoman; and I figure the one in the background for Giganta.

I thought they were Catwoman, Wonder Woman, Elasti Girl (or whomever from the Doom Patrol, Rita Farr) and Starfire. The one with the Red Hair looks to also have Orange Skin. The Giant person could be practically anyone. I just figured they would all be heroes.

[Paul McEnery]

I thought they were Catwoman, Wonder Woman, Elasti Girl (or whomever from the Doom Patrol, Rita Farr) and Starfire. The one with the Red Hair looks to also have Orange Skin. The Giant person could be practically anyone. I just figured they would all be heroes.

Ah, Rita Farr might be a better choice. I'd forgotten she was alive again. Um, probably.

But Starfire? Do the furies konk their hair?

[Harding Prime]

Well Catwoman was pretty obvious, I thought; the red hair means Batwoman; and I figure the one in the background for Giganta.

I thought they were Catwoman, Wonder Woman, Elasti Girl (or whomever from the Doom Patrol, Rita Farr) and Starfire. The one with the Red Hair looks to also have Orange Skin. The Giant person could be practically anyone. I just figured they would all be heroes.

Ah, Rita Farr might be a better choice. I'd forgotten she was alive again. Um, probably.

But Starfire? Do the furies konk their hair?

Or maybe we don't have a consenus. :biggrin:

And that is why I want Pacheco.

[carabas]

IThe one with the Red Hair looks to also have Orange Skin.In that light, they all have orang skin. She has bat-shaped cleavage, a bat on her collar, and a bat-shaped headdress.

But Starfire? Do the furies konk their hair?I have no idea exactly what konking is, but judging from Mary Marvel, there is nothing a Fury won't do to her hair.

[Kid Omega]

I never considered that it was important to know exactly who they are.

It's not really the point of that reveal, it seems...

[Harding Prime]

I never considered that it was important to know exactly who they are.

It's not really the point of that reveal, it seems...

May not be the point, but they are drawn characters, so they should have identities. Jones style of detail pales in comparison to Pacheco is all I'm saying. I just want to make sure that he is still taking over artist duties.

That was my point.

[dotdotdot]

May not be the point, but they are drawn characters, so they should have identities. Jones style of detail pales in comparison to Pacheco is all I'm saying. I just want to make sure that he is still taking over artist duties.

That was my point.

i doubt that detail is the point you want to use to criticize someone like jones.....and pacheco is helping, not exactly taking over

[Jack Zodiac]

As well you should! But really--three comments, in a 54-page thread? That doesn't seem particularly "obsessive" to me.

The story was dull. The path that the conversation has taken is converging on the inevitable "This is ART! Just because a lot of people don't like it doesn't mean it's bad... it means they're too unsophisticated to appreciate it!" Which is, really, nothing more than a way of avoiding saying "some like it, some don't."

No biggie. Just another comic book, folks.

For this title, I think it's equal parts "some like it, some don't" and "some get it, some don't." Grant does write in a bit of an exclusive way. Which isn't good for a big company event book. From a marketing point of view, at least. Personally, I'm glad they finally published an event book that wasn't full of the same old crossover crisis tripe.

Well Catwoman was pretty obvious, I thought; the red hair means Batwoman; and I figure the one in the background for Giganta.

I thought the one with red hair might've been Starfire. But it doesn't really matter. It's a cliffhanger, presumably we'll see those same figures in the next issue and we'll realize who they are. As it stands, all that matters is conveying the "Wally and Barry are !@#$ed" idea.

Or maybe we don't have a consenus. :biggrin:

And that is why I want Pacheco.

Dude's a good artist, sure, but drawing a red-tinted doom scene of four pseudo-mysterious corrupt superheroines on giant dogs isn't going to be remarkably exact for any artist. From J.H. Williams III to Rob Liefeld.

May not be the point, but they are drawn characters, so they should have identities. Jones style of detail pales in comparison to Pacheco is all I'm saying. I just want to make sure that he is still taking over artist duties.

That was my point.

No, it doesn't, and no, he isn't. He's aiding him in art duties, but he isn't taking over. Because Pacheco couldn't handle the level of detail Grant's script demands alone, either.

[Harding Prime]

i doubt that detail is the point you want to use to criticize someone like jones.....and pacheco is helping, not exactly taking over

I thought he was taking the rings over from issue 4 on. Not because Jones can't hack it, but because of personal issues. Detail to characters is the point I make against Jones. Not the little nuances we have beeen talking about, like the white van at the club, or the omega tie pin, his subtle detail is fine. I personally am more of a fan of Jim Lee style of art that is very detailed in the characters. Pacheco is similar, as shown throughout the Superman arc, Camelot Falls. The only issue with Lee and Pacheco's style, which is well documented with Lee, and was a hinder on CF, which I hope doesn't hurt FC, was the delay of the art work.

[Paul McEnery]

I thought he was taking the rings over from issue 4 on.

"reins", I think.

Not because Jones can't hack it, but because of personal issues.

Where do you get this stuff from? Nobody at all has said this.

Detail to characters is the point I make against Jones. Not the little nuances we have beeen talking about, like the white van at the club, or the omega tie pin, his subtle detail is fine. I personally am more of a fan of Jim Lee style of art that is very detailed in the characters.

A lot of tiny little lines is not the same as detail. Lee is a crass artist by comparison, and rubbish at detail.


Pacheco is similar, as shown throughout the Superman arc, Camelot Falls. The only issue with Lee and Pacheco's style, which is well documented with Lee, and was a hinder on CF, which I hope doesn't hurt FC, was the delay of the art work.

Comparing Pacheco to Lee is a bit of an insult, really. I mean, I know he's a fan fave and all, but that's mostly because his drawings have an aura of importance -- he draws the characters in an idealized way that fits with the mythology the fanboys want to believe in. And I can see why the adolescent boys go for it, and fair enough, but it's exactly simplistic forms disguised as complexity that they respond to.

[Kid Omega]

May not be the point, but they are drawn characters, so they should have identities. Jones style of detail pales in comparison to Pacheco is all I'm saying. I just want to make sure that he is still taking over artist duties.

That was my point.

it's not like they're stick figures... It just hasn't been explained who exactly they are... Which seems like an intentional addition the big question "what the he'll happened?"

We don't know anything about that time gap... For me, wondering who the tall superheroine-possessed-by-a-new-god is was secondary to "holy crap apocolypse!!!!!"

I'm sure everything we need to know will become clear...

[Harding Prime]

He's aiding him in art duties, but he isn't taking over. Because Pacheco couldn't handle the level of detail Grant's script demands alone, either.

That was my corncerns of the change. Good to know. Though I wonder how they will work together with two distinctive styles.

[Harding Prime]

"reins", I think.


Where do you get this stuff from? Nobody at all has said this.

Rumors, so obviously someone said it. Don't be a tool.


A lot of tiny little lines is not the same as detail. Lee is a crass artist by comparison, and rubbish at detail.

Comparing Pacheco to Lee is a bit of an insult, really. I mean, I know he's a fan fave and all, but that's mostly because his drawings have an aura of importance -- he draws the characters in an idealized way that fits with the mythology the fanboys want to believe in. And I can see why the adolescent boys go for it, and fair enough, but it's exactly simplistic forms disguised as complexity that they respond to.

You realize, not liking what is popular doesn't make you cool. That is so 90's. You have an inate ability to crasely insult someone, however vague, if they have a different view then you. As if to say I like Lee's drawing style, which the man himself is the best selling comic artist of all time and was named top 5, if not the top, artist by a list made CBR themselves, I must be a 15 year old acne faced child pumping Flo-Rida while reading Top Cow Pin Ups. I am allowed to enjoy a style different then yours, son, and not have to be demeaned because of it. My favorite style of work is not the Miller Noir style that is being portrayed in FC, but not to say that I don't find it intriguing. I enjoy all different styles of art and writing, and don't stick my nose in the air to those that don't share my narrow views.

[Jake V]

I thought he was taking the rings over from issue 4 on. Not because Jones can't hack it, but because of personal issues.

Is there any source for this, or are you just posting everything you imagine?

[dotdotdot]

Rumors, so obviously someone said it. Don't be a tool.



You realize, not liking what is popular doesn't make you cool. That is so 90's. You have an inate ability to crasely insult someone, however vague, if they have a different view then you. As if to say I like Lee's drawing style, which the man himself is the best selling comic artist of all time and was named top 5, if not the top, artist by a list made CBR themselves, I must be a 15 year old acne faced child pumping Flo-Rida while reading Top Cow Pin Ups. I am allowed to enjoy a style different then yours, son, and not have to be demeaned because of it. My favorite style of work is not the Miller Noir style that is being portrayed in FC, but not to say that I don't find it intriguing. I enjoy all different styles of art and writing, and don't stick my nose in the air to those that don't share my narrow views.

really really insulting response. lee is great at pinups, covers, monumental splash pages. lots of his smaller panel work is average to clunky at best. he isn't the most skilled artist, not a great sense of economy, etc. watching him sketch is insane and everything, but it isn't just possible to not have a huge enthusiam for lee anymore (it isn't the 90s), it's quite likely. lee is sortof the epitome of 90s flash and spectacle, so you should be aware of the very obvious counterargument that is going to come up. also, i can't see any relation to miller from jones's work, this just makes me think you don't read many comics or something. just an odd comparison.

[Harding Prime]

really really insulting response. lee is great at pinups, covers, monumental splash pages. lots of his smaller panel work is average to clunky at best. he isn't the most skilled artist, not a great sense of economy, etc. watching him sketch is insane and everything, but it isn't just possible to not have a huge enthusiam for lee anymore (it isn't the 90s), it's quite likely. lee is sortof the epitome of 90s flash and spectacle, so you should be aware of the very obvious counterargument that is going to come up. also, i can't see any relation to miller from jones's work, this just makes me think you don't read many comics or something. just an odd comparison.

I can understand the counterargument and have no problem with it, that is practically become the purpose of these threads. And your take of Lee is very understanable, because so many of us look at the 90's as the low point in comic history, and Lee was the biggest artist of that time. He was also the biggest artist for DC in the new millenia for Hush and (dare I say) For Tomorrow. As well as doing the covers for IC. He is still well recieved, which I would say is impressive as hated the 90's period is. Insulting was what I was responding to, which is not to you, so don't feel offended. And when I was speaking of miller's noir style, I was comparing the noir writing style of Morrison that goes with the artwork to Miller, not necessarily the artwork done by Miller. A bit off the topic I was speaking of, so I understand the confusion.

[Paul McEnery]

You realize, not liking what is popular doesn't make you cool. That is so 90's. You have an inate ability to crasely insult someone, however vague, if they have a different view then you. As if to say I like Lee's drawing style, which the man himself is the best selling comic artist of all time and was named top 5, if not the top, artist by a list made CBR themselves, I must be a 15 year old acne faced child pumping Flo-Rida while reading Top Cow Pin Ups.

Tom Clancy sells a lot of novels; doesn't make him a good writer. The point is that different artists have different strengths and weaknesses of different artists, and detail doesn't happen to be one of Lee's strengths. There's always vast swathes of empty space in his books these days, and he draws in very broad strokes.

If the WILDCATS book had worked out, he'd have been the right artist for the job (I mean, you know, obviously!); but for a book like this that's got a ton of fiddly little bits to fit into the corners of a gazillion tiny panels -- not so much. Especially if you wanted it before the end of the world.

Grant wanted Jones because he doesn't do the over-the-top mythological style of a Jim Lee -- which is, I guess, going for something Kirbyesque in terms of stature, if pretty much the opposite in stylistic choices; instead, he does human scale expressive figures, and the point of that is to bring Grant's hifalutin' concepts down to earth a bit.

I am allowed to enjoy a style different then yours, son, and not have to be demeaned because of it. My favorite style of work is not the Miller Noir style that is being portrayed in FC, but not to say that I don't find it intriguing. I enjoy all different styles of art and writing, and don't stick my nose in the air to those that don't share my narrow views.

Geez, take things personally, why don't you! It's not a matter of taste, it's a matter of objectively appreciating what particular artists bring to the table, and which projects they're best suited for.

[Kid Omega]

Rumors, so obviously someone said it. Don't be a tool.



You realize, not liking what is popular doesn't make you cool. That is so 90's. You have an inate ability to crasely insult someone, however vague, if they have a different view then you. As if to say I like Lee's drawing style, which the man himself is the best selling comic artist of all time and was named top 5, if not the top, artist by a list made CBR themselves, I must be a 15 year old acne faced child pumping Flo-Rida while reading Top Cow Pin Ups. I am allowed to enjoy a style different then yours, son, and not have to be demeaned because of it. My favorite style of work is not the Miller Noir style that is being portrayed in FC, but not to say that I don't find it intriguing. I enjoy all different styles of art and writing, and don't stick my nose in the air to those that don't share my narrow views.

Jim lee is hardly the best selling artist of all time.

Likely not even in the top twenty.

[Harding Prime]

Is there any source for this, or are you just posting everything you imagine?

I read it on a previous thread as to why the reason being they where bringing on Pacheco. And I didn't say it was accurate. I said, oh, something I heard.

Yes, I imagine Carlos Pacheco is taking over the REINS of FC and that is was because Jones was having peronal issues. My imagination would be awesome because I was half right.

[Paul McEnery]

Yes, I imagine Carlos Pacheco is taking over the REINS of FC and that is was because Jones was having peronal issues.
.

It's true. He's switching careers to play the lead in Evita.

[Kid Omega]

It's true. He's switching careers to play the lead in Evita.

I read that on a message board.

[Harding Prime]

Tom Clancy sells a lot of novels; doesn't make him a good writer. The point is that different artists have different strengths and weaknesses of different artists, and detail doesn't happen to be one of Lee's strengths. There's always vast swathes of empty space in his books these days, and he draws in very broad strokes.

If the WILDCATS book had worked out, he'd have been the right artist for the job (I mean, you know, obviously!); but for a book like this that's got a ton of fiddly little bits to fit into the corners of a gazillion tiny panels -- not so much. Especially if you wanted it before the end of the world.

Grant wanted Jones because he doesn't do the over-the-top mythological style of a Jim Lee -- which is, I guess, going for something Kirbyesque in terms of stature, if pretty much the opposite in stylistic choices; instead, he does human scale expressive figures, and the point of that is to bring Grant's hifalutin' concepts down to earth a bit.



Geez, take things personally, why don't you! It's not a matter of taste, it's a matter of objectively appreciating what particular artists bring to the table, and which projects they're best suited for.


Okay, everything you just said I agree with. After the last 3 issues of FC, if they brought in Jim Lee, that might be the worst idea ever. I don't think that Grant working with Lee would ever be a great fit, just as I don't think Lee working with Miller IS a great fit. If you bring your responses in a non insulting manner like this, I won't have a problem at all.

I know I sound somewhat contradicting saying I want Pacheco for FC, when comparing him to Lee, but I compare them by their detailed splash type pages. Working with Jones, Pacheco can focus on the large character pictures and Jones can work on the style and subtle nuances of the universe background, they might make a great fit.

[Tom]

FC #3, people. Focus.

[Harding Prime]

It's true. He's switching careers to play the lead in Evita.

That is a brave role to play, going to Eddie Izzard route. He can't do worse then Madonna. Good luck to him.

[Harding Prime]

Sorry Tom, one last jab. :-)

[Harding Prime]

Jim lee is hardly the best selling artist of all time.

Likely not even in the top twenty.

He has the highest selling single issue of all time.

I would imagine Kirby is the best selling artist of all time. Though I don't know if they keep count of that.

Edit: Is Pacheco starting on the next issue?

[Kid Omega]

He has the highest selling single issue of all time.

That is incorrect.

[HaroldAllnut]

"Superheroes. KILL." Two of the most exciting words this past month.

[Trey]

Man some people just don't "get" Grant Morrison.....jk

Here's how I look at FC, in terms of music. If you thought you were going to get a main-stream rock album, and instead it turned out to be death metal, I can see why many of you don't like this story or this meandering approach to writing.

I enjoy all rock music, but I also enjoy the mood/tone of some death metal (opeth). ANd this story is really a giant, hopeless, meandering, oppressive event. AND I ENJOY IT. Because like all good death metal, its cathartic, it gets it out of my system. Its Morrison exploring evil/oppression/and complete loss of hope. Its freakin Death Metal.

[Xevious]

Final Crisis 3 definitely said to me "wait for the trade." I like what I'm reading so far, but it seems that it's being written for a nice sit down. I'm not going to hold onto all this information for two months before the next issue comes out. I do really enjoy how dense this is.

[berk]

Final Crisis 3 definitely said to me "wait for the trade." I like what I'm reading so far, but it seems that it's being written for a nice sit down. I'm not going to hold onto all this information for two months before the next issue comes out. I do really enjoy how dense this is.I started off that way, befor the first issue came out, I mean. I had intended to wait for the trade, but that first installment caught my interest to the extent that I caved in and started buying the issues as they came out.

[Harding Prime]

That is incorrect.

No, its not, X-Men #1 has sold over 8 million copies and is far and away the #1 selling comic of all time. Now this is not what this thread is for, so stop getting owned.

That's exactly how I'm looking at it. Johns and Robinson have said they don't want to "deal with" Jimmy's knowledge in the Superman titles, so I'm not expecting any new developments in the foreground anytime soon... but I hope they don't outright contradict or retcon it either, as it definitely makes for interesting subtext.

I just read over this panel again, and I totally think their is the underlying, "yeah, we know, lets just not talk about it" thing going on between Jimmy and Clark. It seems more like Jimmy is trying to make Superman feel better then Clark, saying at least Superman got all the shrapnel out of her heart and not even Superman could reached the bomb in time when Clark questions why he could not have moved fast enough. I mean, I know Clark is a reporter, but it's not his job to suspect a bomb placed by a pseudo Jimmy and act on it. It's almost as if he was speaking as Superman in that line. And Jimmy saying I should give you time alone because the world hasn't seen Superman in a while, isn't a shot at Superman, but a chance for him to grieve and come back to the world that still needs him too.

[Jack Tango]

I started off that way, befor the first issue came out, I mean. I had intended to wait for the trade, but that first installment caught my interest to the extent that I caved in and started buying the issues as they came out.

I wish I had the patience to wait for the trades. I like having them on a bookshelf, ready to be re-read at anytime. I have so many great issues lying around in individual format and it's a pain to pull them all just to get one story, but I just can't wait the 3/5/7/12 months just to get the nice format.

I wonder if I can convince my comic shop to offer a "Trade Up to the Trades" option... Hmm...

Bleargh.

[Jack Zodiac]

No, its not, X-Men #1 has sold over 8 million copies and is far and away the #1 selling comic of all time. Now this is not what this thread is for, so stop getting owned.

Western comics, maybe. Copies of One Piece sell in the hundreds of millions.

[Dennis]

Man some people just don't "get" Grant Morrison.....jk

Here's how I look at FC, in terms of music. If you thought you were going to get a main-stream rock album, and instead it turned out to be death metal, I can see why many of you don't like this story or this meandering approach to writing.

I enjoy all rock music, but I also enjoy the mood/tone of some death metal (opeth). ANd this story is really a giant, hopeless, meandering, oppressive event. AND I ENJOY IT. Because like all good death metal, its cathartic, it gets it out of my system. Its Morrison exploring evil/oppression/and complete loss of hope. Its freakin Death Metal.

It's more like Pat Boone or Paul Anka doing covers of hard rock songs...it's cute fun. I like Grant but he can't do depressing. When he killed 16 million mutants, it was silly fun (Magneto getting hit by a giant robot fist). Professor X says during the massacre, "No one saw it coming..they were drinking tea..making love.." Who talks like that after the most horrific event ever? A giant Sentinel insectoid monster taking out Genosha is about as serious as Godzilla.

In Grant's world, everything will go back to normal and the party can continue. He believes life is a party, and the bad guys are the ones who crash and make an ass of themselves. But they'll get escorted out and the party can continue. Everything will be ok is Grant's mantra. Every boo boo can be healed. Even if lots of people die, the really cool popular people will most likely survive and party harder than ever. What does not kill me makes me sexier.

Bruce Wayne living on the streets and full of heroin and crack might seem devastating. But then he sews his own purple and yellow Batman costume and claims to be from another planet. It's comedy. All of Grant's tragedies end in comedy. Which is perfectly fine and healthy. He never lingers on depressing scenes, he writes them but quickly transmutes it into comedy, or quickly changes the subject, which is usually sexy people talking about weird things.

Final Crisis is a story of hope. It's really about the forces of dark or repressed sexuality battling the armies of healthy sexuality. The villains meet in a strip joint; Mary Marvel gets into bdsm; cavemen attacking and trying to rape another tribe; abducting children; the youngest monitor (most virile) being banished; Turpin getting turned on when he's beating the Mad Hatter.

The villains are beating the heroes by taking away their sexuality or perverting it: Green Lantern losing the power of his ring represents impotence; Wonder Woman becoming one of those bdsm freaks; Lois being injured; Batman becoming a "plaything" for Granny.

The anti-life equation is like a super std, a super AIDS. The bad guys are trying to turn love into death.

The Human Flame represents the average frustrated chump - someone who probably can't get a date. He's the opposite of sexy. Grant is trying to make the point that the bad guys' sexuality is inherently unsexy.

Green Arrow and Black Canary might be instrumental in saving the day, they're shown having a healthy sexual relationship. And of course the Super Young Team is Super Sexy.

So what happens when everyone is infected with the anti-life equation. You live with it. You transmute it. What does not kill you makes you sexier.

[misterbonesy]

Been out of town for a few weeks and just read FC #3. Man, this story is going nowhere. And for it to be called a "Crisis" is a joke. This was the worst issue by far, a complete waste of time and money. The Shiloh Norman/Sonny Sumo/Super Great Cool Japanese Team stuff could've been summed up in a page. And a panel with Clark and Lois would've done the job. Morrison sure knows how to drag things out, I'll give him that. And enough with "bad" Mary Marvel - how many times is she going to turn bad? This whole issue reeked of "filler" and the art was pretty awful, too. Jones is good on covers but, yeah, he shouldn't do interiors. This series stinks.

[Kid Omega]

Western comics, maybe. Copies of One Piece sell in the hundreds of millions.

Europe and Japan aside, Bob Oskner's BOB HOPE comics sold astounding numbers. As did RICHIE RICH, CASPER, ARCHIE in it's prime, CAPTAIN MARVEL....

Whatever. I've been "owned".

How does this relate to FC?

Sales don't mean shit when you're discussing the merit of the thing itself.

This is a book that is flying softly under many folks' radar, while it gently whoops up on the DCU's ass. I approve.

[LtMarvel]

Been out of town for a few weeks and just read FC #3. Man, this story is going nowhere. And for it to be called a "Crisis" is a joke. This was the worst issue by far, a complete waste of time and money. The Shiloh Norman/Sonny Sumo/Super Great Cool Japanese Team stuff could've been summed up in a page. And a panel with Clark and Lois would've done the job. Morrison sure knows how to drag things out, I'll give him that. And enough with "bad" Mary Marvel - how many times is she going to turn bad? This whole issue reeked of "filler" and the art was pretty awful, too. Jones is good on covers but, yeah, he shouldn't do interiors. This series stinks.
In fairness, she's only turned bad twice...both in Countdown.

Well, there was the time Ultra-Humanite took over the world...

Okay, 3 times!

I don't believe doing everything in one panel is good story telling...

[Harding Prime]

Whatever. I've been "owned".

How does this relate to FC?


No, its not, X-Men #1 has sold over 8 million copies and is far and away the #1 selling comic of all time. Now this is not what this thread is for, so stop getting owned.


So we agree :confused:

Then why not bring up the other 9/10th's of my post instead of bringing up the part that has nothing to do with the thread, which I stated.


I just read over this panel again, and I totally think their is the underlying, "yeah, we know, lets just not talk about it" thing going on between Jimmy and Clark. It seems more like Jimmy is trying to make Superman feel better then Clark, saying at least Superman got all the shrapnel out of her heart and not even Superman could reached the bomb in time when Clark questions why he could not have moved fast enough. I mean, I know Clark is a reporter, but it's not his job to suspect a bomb placed by a pseudo Jimmy and act on it. It's almost as if he was speaking as Superman in that line. And Jimmy saying I should give you time alone because the world hasn't seen Superman in a while, isn't a shot at Superman, but a chance for him to grieve and come back to the world that still needs him too.


So, what do you think of the Clark/Jimmy conversation...if you wanna talk about the story.

[Jake V]

Western comics, maybe. Copies of One Piece sell in the hundreds of millions.

Those aren't comics, only kids read those!!

They aren't even in the right dimensions!!!

[Tanjint]

It's more like Pat Boone or Paul Anka doing covers of hard rock songs...it's cute fun. I like Grant but he can't do depressing. When he killed 16 million mutants, it was silly fun (Magneto getting hit by a giant robot fist). Professor X says during the massacre, "No one saw it coming..they were drinking tea..making love.." Who talks like that after the most horrific event ever? A giant Sentinel insectoid monster taking out Genosha is about as serious as Godzilla.

In Grant's world, everything will go back to normal and the party can continue. He believes life is a party, and the bad guys are the ones who crash and make an ass of themselves. But they'll get escorted out and the party can continue. Everything will be ok is Grant's mantra. Every boo boo can be healed. Even if lots of people die, the really cool popular people will most likely survive and party harder than ever. What does not kill me makes me sexier.

Bruce Wayne living on the streets and full of heroin and crack might seem devastating. But then he sews his own purple and yellow Batman costume and claims to be from another planet. It's comedy. All of Grant's tragedies end in comedy. Which is perfectly fine and healthy. He never lingers on depressing scenes, he writes them but quickly transmutes it into comedy, or quickly changes the subject, which is usually sexy people talking about weird things.

Final Crisis is a story of hope. It's really about the forces of dark or repressed sexuality battling the armies of healthy sexuality. The villains meet in a strip joint; Mary Marvel gets into bdsm; cavemen attacking and trying to rape another tribe; abducting children; the youngest monitor (most virile) being banished; Turpin getting turned on when he's beating the Mad Hatter.

The villains are beating the heroes by taking away their sexuality or perverting it: Green Lantern losing the power of his ring represents impotence; Wonder Woman becoming one of those bdsm freaks; Lois being injured; Batman becoming a "plaything" for Granny.

The anti-life equation is like a super std, a super AIDS. The bad guys are trying to turn love into death.

The Human Flame represents the average frustrated chump - someone who probably can't get a date. He's the opposite of sexy. Grant is trying to make the point that the bad guys' sexuality is inherently unsexy.

Green Arrow and Black Canary might be instrumental in saving the day, they're shown having a healthy sexual relationship. And of course the Super Young Team is Super Sexy.

So what happens when everyone is infected with the anti-life equation. You live with it. You transmute it. What does not kill you makes you sexier.

I see what you mean and that's a cool and interesting take.

But many parts of the Invisibles show me that Grant can do tragedy and depressing sad horrible stuff all too well.

True you can say it all ends well...but there are huge costs for that ultimate victory and some of the darker stuff there was definitely lingered upon.


-T

[the4thpip]

Jim lee is hardly the best selling artist of all time.

Likely not even in the top twenty.

Final Crisis with art by Curt Swan and Murphy Anderson would have looked pretty.

[Tobias March]

In fairness, she's only turned bad twice...both in Countdown.

Well, there was the time Ultra-Humanite took over the world...

Okay, 3 times!

I don't believe doing everything in one panel is good story telling...

Also there was I Can't Believe It's Not the Justice League. And then again in it's sequel, there was an alternative earth Evil Mary.....man she's been evil plenty of times.

And I just loved Dennis' post.

[JCAll]

Man some people just don't "get" Grant Morrison.....jk

Here's how I look at FC, in terms of music. If you thought you were going to get a main-stream rock album, and instead it turned out to be death metal, I can see why many of you don't like this story or this meandering approach to writing.

I enjoy all rock music, but I also enjoy the mood/tone of some death metal (opeth). ANd this story is really a giant, hopeless, meandering, oppressive event. AND I ENJOY IT. Because like all good death metal, its cathartic, it gets it out of my system. Its Morrison exploring evil/oppression/and complete loss of hope. Its freakin Death Metal.

A better musical reference. Reading Final Crisis is like buying a CD of Johnny Cash's Greatest Hits only to find that the CD is actually the Best of Polka. Then you CD player won't turn off. Then everyone around you starts wearing lederhosen, playing the accordian, and talking about how awesome Polka is. And the whole effect just leaves you scratching your head wondering what just went wrong with the world.

[TeamED209]

I've enjoyed FC so far and FC3 was the best of the lot so far for me..the only thing that got me a little confused was the batman/john stewart thing and i think thats the main problem with FC and i've read it here a few time. the lay out and art really doesn't help this well thought out story get its idea's across very well...
otherwise this is a great fresh take on the cross over events and im keen to see where it goes...
to be honest just the fact that i can't predict where this is going which is unusual for me is one of the big plus factors of the series

[LtMarvel]

Also there was I Can't Believe It's Not the Justice League. And then again in it's sequel, there was an alternative earth Evil Mary.....man she's been evil plenty of times.

And I just loved Dennis' post.
You can't count evil counterparts as turning the original evil...

But I did forget about Roulette's arena...

So 4 times has Mary been evil...

[Vlad]

I am really enjoying this series so far. I cannot wait for the next issue!

[lawman]

If the WILDCATS book had worked out, he'd have been the right artist for the job (I mean, you know, obviously!); but for a book like this that's got a ton of fiddly little bits to fit into the corners of a gazillion tiny panels -- not so much. Especially if you wanted it before the end of the world.
If that's what was needed, Perez would have been the perfect artist, obviously. (Except that they put him on the Legion project instead, which arguably calls for even *more* of that kind of detail.)

Grant wanted Jones because he doesn't do the over-the-top mythological style of a Jim Lee -- which is, I guess, going for something Kirbyesque in terms of stature, if pretty much the opposite in stylistic choices; instead, he does human scale expressive figures, and the point of that is to bring Grant's hifalutin' concepts down to earth a bit.
If that's what was needed (it's not the same thing), then J.H. Williams III would have been perfect. He certainly knocked everyone's socks off on Seven Soldiers, and on Grant's recent "Club of Heroes" Batman story as well.

For that matter, given all the Kirby riffs here, there's an argument that a more bombastic Kirbyesque style would have been appropriate here, too -- whether Lee or someone else similar.

Any way you slice it, Jones seems to have been a rather quixotic choice. His covers are always great, but his layouts and panel-to-panel continuity are lackluster.

Geez, take things personally, why don't you! It's not a matter of taste, it's a matter of objectively appreciating what particular artists bring to the table, and which projects they're best suited for.
People take things personally because you leave them no choice -- dropping snarky little insinuations, or even flat-out insults, into almost every post. This is a matter of taste -- questions of art are intrinsically subjective. The fact that you keep insisting there's some single "objectively" correct view about this book, and copping the attitude that you're the one with the clarity of vision to see it (and thus feel entitled to malign anyone who disagrees) is just morbidly amusing at this point.

[lawman]

In Grant's world, everything will go back to normal and the party can continue. He believes life is a party, and the bad guys are the ones who crash and make an ass of themselves. But they'll get escorted out and the party can continue. Everything will be ok is Grant's mantra. Every boo boo can be healed. Even if lots of people die, the really cool popular people will most likely survive and party harder than ever. What does not kill me makes me sexier...

Final Crisis is a story of hope. It's really about the forces of dark or repressed sexuality battling the armies of healthy sexuality. The villains meet in a strip joint; Mary Marvel gets into bdsm; cavemen attacking and trying to rape another tribe; abducting children; the youngest monitor (most virile) being banished; Turpin getting turned on when he's beating the Mad Hatter.

The villains are beating the heroes by taking away their sexuality or perverting it: Green Lantern losing the power of his ring represents impotence; Wonder Woman becoming one of those bdsm freaks; Lois being injured; Batman becoming a "plaything" for Granny.
Now this is an interesting take on the book's themes... and all the more refreshing at this point if only because it's so different from Paul's. :biggrin:

Still doesn't make me impressed with the storytelling, but at least it's a more interesting bundle of symbolism to ponder...

[carabas]

I think it'd have been interesting to see what tom Scioli (G0dwar from Image) would have done with it.

[Harding Prime]

If that's what was needed, Perez would have been the perfect artist, obviously. (Except that they put him on the Legion project instead, which arguably calls for even *more* of that kind of detail.)


If that's what was needed (it's not the same thing), then J.H. Williams III would have been perfect. He certainly knocked everyone's socks off on Seven Soldiers, and on Grant's recent "Club of Heroes" Batman story as well.

For that matter, given all the Kirby riffs here, there's an argument that a more bombastic Kirbyesque style would have been appropriate here, too -- whether Lee or someone else similar.

Any way you slice it, Jones seems to have been a rather quixotic choice. His covers are always great, but his layouts and panel-to-panel continuity are lackluster.


People take things personally because you leave them no choice -- dropping snarky little insinuations, or even flat-out insults, into almost every post. This is a matter of taste -- questions of art are intrinsically subjective. The fact that you keep insisting there's some single "objectively" correct view about this book, and copping the attitude that you're the one with the clarity of vision to see it (and thus feel entitled to malign anyone who disagrees) is just morbidly amusing at this point.

Is it okay if i quote this for truth. :-D

Moving on. I have read the story altogether, includng the directors cut. I have no problem keeping up with the story this way and am enjoying it better the second time around. my only issue now is how is granny goodness posessing an ai with a higher level intelligence. i know the evil gods reincarnated here on earth and her incarnate died. so some how she ends up in a higher species on OA. That just doesnt add up for me. we'll see...

[Jeff F]

Moving on. I have read the story altogether, includng the directors cut. I have no problem keeping up with the story this way and am enjoying it better the second time around. my only issue now is how is granny goodness posessing an ai with a higher level intelligence. i know the evil gods reincarnated here on earth and her incarnate died. so some how she ends up in a higher species on OA. That just doesnt add up for me. we'll see...

I assume you're referring to Kraken, the GL Alpha Lantern?

Kraken is not just AI and is from Apokolips.

It actually works quite well logistically.

[Calybos]

A better musical reference. Reading Final Crisis is like buying a CD of Johnny Cash's Greatest Hits only to find that the CD is actually the Best of Polka. Then you CD player won't turn off. Then everyone around you starts wearing lederhosen, playing the accordian, and talking about how awesome Polka is. And the whole effect just leaves you scratching your head wondering what just went wrong with the world.

Okay, that was pretty dang funny!

[Harding Prime]

I assume you're referring to Kraken, the GL Alpha Lantern?

Kraken is not just AI and is from Apokolips.

It actually works quite well logistically.
Yes. You know i'm speaking of the alpha lantern cyborg kraken. Since alpha lanterns are retro active in canon by johns i imagine for this purpose. I guess you got this info about the alpha lanterns being from apokolips from reading GL?

[Jeff F]

Yes. You know i'm speaking of the alpha lantern cyborg kraken. Since alpha lanterns are retro active in canon by johns i imagine for this purpose. I guess you got this info about the alpha lanterns being from apokolips from reading GL?

Retroactive in canon? Nothing Retroactive about the Alpha Lanterns.

And yea, I read GL and GLC.

[Paul McEnery]

I think it'd have been interesting to see what tom Scioli (G0dwar from Image) would have done with it.

Oh, he will, he will.

[Paul McEnery]

A better musical reference. Reading Final Crisis is like buying a CD of Johnny Cash's Greatest Hits only to find that the CD is actually the Best of Polka. Then you CD player won't turn off. Then everyone around you starts wearing lederhosen, playing the accordian, and talking about how awesome Polka is. And the whole effect just leaves you scratching your head wondering what just went wrong with the world.

Memetic invasion from Earth 10! :eek:











Also, it's more like your CD starts skipping during Cash's version of The Mercy Seat.

[berk]

... and all the more refreshing at this point if only because it's so different from Paul's. :biggrin:Boy, this is really getting old. Is it really necessary to bring this up in every post? I don't even feel like saying anything about the series any more because it seems as if any statement at all is going to end up being drawn into this personal vendetta you seem to have going against another poster.

[edit:]And I'm sorry, everyone. I realise that me making my own peronal remarks isn't going to improve the atmosphere in the thread any.

[Jack Tango]

Retroactive in canon? Nothing Retroactive about the Alpha Lanterns.

And yea, I read GL and GLC.

Kinda sorta see what Harding means by that.

Morrison created the Alpha Lanterns for usage in Final Crisis, told Johns about it, and he decided to throw it into a storyline in the Green Lantern regular series.

So, it's a concept that was meant to debut in the future, but instead co-opted to appear in advance.

[ZeoVGM]

Well, I just read this and the new issue of Batman, and as I said in the Batman thread, Grant has lost his marbles.


FC #2 was a ncie step up. ... Now #3 is out. And I'm officially calling the series a mess. It's not as insanely dumb as R.I.P. but I'm really not feeling it. And it's pretty disgusting what they did to Mary.

[dotdotdot]

Well, I just read this and the new issue of Batman, and as I said in the Batman thread, Grant has lost his marbles.


FC #2 was a ncie step up. ... Now #3 is out. And I'm officially calling the series a mess. It's not as insanely dumb as R.I.P. but I'm really not feeling it. And it's pretty disgusting what they did to Mary.

these are the same marbles grant has always had

[Paul McEnery]

these are the same marbles grant has always had

But Greece wants them back.

[Harding Prime]

Kinda sorta see what Harding means by that.

Morrison created the Alpha Lanterns for usage in Final Crisis, told Johns about it, and he decided to throw it into a storyline in the Green Lantern regular series.

So, it's a concept that was meant to debut in the future, but instead co-opted to appear in advance.

Excerpt from FC#1 Directors Cut

Grant:"...Geoff Johns helped further develop the Alpha Lanterns in Green Lantern Retroactively."

Thanks for having my back Tango. And that was more information from the the Directors Cut, which you were asking me about.

Grant seemed to have come up with the idea of the "CSI" Lanterns when he first started FC, as well documented, right at the end of IC. So after Sinestro Corps, Johns proactively placed the Alpha Lanterns into canon. And, IMHO, did a great job, as he seems to do pretty consistently.

[Tanjint]

man I can't wait for the Batman RIP collected edition as I trade-wait on Morrison's Batman...

anyway, I don't think JG Jones has poor story-telling abilities. Marvel Boy, wanted, hiketeia and more show that...but never in the interviews regarding FC have I gotten the impression that he's as emotionally invested in the project as he was the previously mentioned ones.

to me, he consistently gives the impression that he was gonna do some non-DC work when DC offered him the biggest (and probably biggest paying) most prestigious event book with a well-liked writer/previous collaborator. It also seems like he's doing it because he felt everyone else wanted him to moreso than a personal desire to do this book. More excited about the idea of working with Grant again than the idea of depicting the whole damn DCU.

all this is conjecture based on little comments and connotations I get from the interviews. "the kiddies want their monthly comics..." comes to mind but there's others that I can't think of, but I've read most of his interviews regarding the project and these are the impressions I get.

whereas when I met him and asked about the hiketeia his eyes lit up and he talkes about how he pursued doing that project or in other interviews where he and the interviewer talk about individual issues of marvel boy as some of his best work or with wanted where he and Millar were clearly excited about doing such a cool book etc...


-T

[Sean Walsh]

I assume you're referring to Kraken, the GL Alpha Lantern?

Kraken is not just AI and is from Apokolips.

It actually works quite well logistically.

Is she from Apokalips? All we really know about her (she was introduced briefly in the midst of the Sinestro Corps War) was that she was Raker's GL partner on Apokalips. Nothing really more than that has ever been revealed about her, has it?

[carabas]

Is she from Apokalips? All we really know about her (she was introduced briefly in the midst of the Sinestro Corps War) was that she was Raker's GL partner on Apokalips. Nothing really more than that has ever been revealed about her, has it?The Guardians Of The Universe called her Kraken of the planet Apokolips when they did the Alpha Lantern roll call in the Green Lantern book. And in the same issue, she mentioned being involved in a war against Apokolips. So I reckon she's like Barda.

[Paul McEnery]

Excerpt from FC#1 Directors Cut

Grant:"...Geoff Johns helped further develop the Alpha Lanterns in Green Lantern Retroactively."

Thanks for having my back Tango. And that was more information from the the Directors Cut, which you were asking me about.

Grant seemed to have come up with the idea of the "CSI" Lanterns when he first started FC, as well documented, right at the end of IC. So after Sinestro Corps, Johns proactively placed the Alpha Lanterns into canon. And, IMHO, did a great job, as he seems to do pretty consistently.

Ah, that's what you meant by retroactively! I didn't get that the first time round.

[Jeff F]

Excerpt from FC#1 Directors Cut

Grant:"...Geoff Johns helped further develop the Alpha Lanterns in Green Lantern Retroactively."

Thanks for having my back Tango. And that was more information from the the Directors Cut, which you were asking me about.

Grant seemed to have come up with the idea of the "CSI" Lanterns when he first started FC, as well documented, right at the end of IC. So after Sinestro Corps, Johns proactively placed the Alpha Lanterns into canon. And, IMHO, did a great job, as he seems to do pretty consistently.

I'm not sure Grant knows what Retroactive means:)

[Shellhead]

I don't know much about the current incarnation of Supergirl, except from reading Legion and Brave & the Bold. I liked her in B&B, but found her dull in Legion, even though Waid was writing both titles.

Anyway, I've only read the first 30 pages of this thread so far, but I wanted to ask a question that may have already been answered:

Did anybody else think that it was weird that the painting on the easel in Supergirl's place depicted a large tentacled creature covered with large eyeballs? Apparently she is an artist. If so, maybe she picked up on the multiuniversal disturbance created by Darkseid, much in the same way that artists and poets were affected by the broadcast dreams of Cthulhu in that Lovecraft classic, "The Call of Cthulhu", just before his awakening.

[Paul McEnery]

I don't know much about the current incarnation of Supergirl, except from reading Legion and Brave & the Bold. I liked her in B&B, but found her dull in Legion, even though Waid was writing both titles.

Anyway, I've only read the first 30 pages of this thread so far, but I wanted to ask a question that may have already been answered:

Did anybody else think that it was weird that the painting on the easel in Supergirl's place depicted a large tentacled creature covered with large eyeballs? Apparently she is an artist. If so, maybe she picked up on the multiuniversal disturbance created by Darkseid, much in the same way that artists and poets were affected by the broadcast dreams of Cthulhu in that Lovecraft classic, "The Call of Cthulhu", just before his awakening.

Huh.

You know how Grant said the real Big Bad was going to be revealed later on in the book...

[dotdotdot]

I don't know much about the current incarnation of Supergirl, except from reading Legion and Brave & the Bold. I liked her in B&B, but found her dull in Legion, even though Waid was writing both titles.

Anyway, I've only read the first 30 pages of this thread so far, but I wanted to ask a question that may have already been answered:

Did anybody else think that it was weird that the painting on the easel in Supergirl's place depicted a large tentacled creature covered with large eyeballs? Apparently she is an artist. If so, maybe she picked up on the multiuniversal disturbance created by Darkseid, much in the same way that artists and poets were affected by the broadcast dreams of Cthulhu in that Lovecraft classic, "The Call of Cthulhu", just before his awakening.

i definitely assumed it was a quick reference to the sort of elder gods from the abyss returning in lovecraft fashion, just as the true forms of the fourth (fifth?) world gods are soon to be revealed

[carabas]

I don't know. It might just be a completely innocent alien landscape with alien flora.

[Harding Prime]

I don't know. It might just be a completely innocent alien landscape with alien flora.

That doesn't seem to be the way Grant or Jones play. Everything has a meaning between the two.

[dotdotdot]

That doesn't seem to be the way Grant or Jones play. Everything has a meaning between the two.

not only that, but many tentacled alien is just a built in lovecraft comment every time
i'm not sure how intentional it was, but it's there and it adds something to the scene. we'll see how supergirls time in the next issue plays out.

[Zenith23]

not only that, but many tentacled alien is just a built in lovecraft comment every time
i'm not sure how intentional it was, but it's there and it adds something to the scene. we'll see how supergirls time in the next issue plays out.

It's definately intentional, I'm gonna scoot back and have a sniff at my old 2000AD issues with the Zenith stories. there's quite a bit in common,

gods possessing superheroes: the lloigor = ALE

the multiverse being a structure: Omnihedron=Orrery

What ever the real threat is I'm sure we've already been introduced to them/it.

[Sean Walsh]

You know how Grant said the real Big Bad was going to be revealed later on in the book...

Well, in theory we haven't really seen the true Darkseid at all yet. Just him using the forms of Boss Dark Side and his temporary avatars/hosts.




.........holding out hope it's really Captain Carrot nonetheless. *crosses fingers*

[celticguy]

Well, in theory we haven't really seen the true Darkseid at all yet. Just him using the forms of Boss Dark Side and his temporary avatars/hosts.





.........holding out hope it's really Captain Carrot nonetheless. *crosses fingers*



Maybe it is Mr. Mxiplxzzly (sic)

or Batmite.

[Sean Walsh]

Maybe it is Mr. Mxiplxzzly (sic)

or Batmite.

<being serious>
I think Mxy gave up on our dimension when Superboy-Prime tortured him in COUNTDOWN. And Bat-Mite's kinda busy over in that other Grant Morrison story: Batman RIP.
</being serious>

<not being serious>
Captain Carrot vs. Mxy vs. Bat-Mite: THE ONLY WAY FINAL CRISIS CAN END!!!!!!!!!!!!!111111111111
</not being serious>

[mdg1]

The Monitors exist outside the Multiverse. I wonder if anything else does....

[celticguy]

<being serious>
I think Mxy gave up on our dimension when Superboy-Prime tortured him in COUNTDOWN. And Bat-Mite's kinda busy over in that other Grant Morrison story: Batman RIP.
</being serious>

<not being serious>
Captain Carrot vs. Mxy vs. Bat-Mite: THE ONLY WAY FINAL CRISIS CAN END!!!!!!!!!!!!!111111111111
</not being serious>


but remember how the Alex ross story ended when Superman had to face his greatest foe. I admit it would be far fetched but I would like it be to less predictable that darkseid. Even Highfather would make me happier.

[Chemical King]

Just read FC #3 and I have to say - I'm really angry about the crap they are throwing in our direction. This is no coherent storytelling anymore, it is just a patchwork of allegedly cool flashes of inspiration which only serve to confuse the reader out of his way...

I really hate what Grant Morrisson is doing on this book - which is no wonder cause I did not like anything he did over the last ten years - and am currently close to leave DC comics behind.

What makes me most angry is the constant flow of new question marks which keep on coming up. Not good, mysterious, interesting questions like in "Lost", but annoying, useless question marks like: Who is Father Time, and why is he working with Frankensteins Monster? What happened in Blüdhaven that is so bad? How did Barry Allen suddenly reappear? Who is Überfräulein and if she's German, why does she talk such nonsense? Who are the Tiger next to Marvel Jr. and the black Mister Miracle, and since when is there a new Aquaman? Why is the Mary Marvel part of Countdown still valid while the Darkseid part is seemingly not?

And the question to top all: Why should I bother to figure it all out when there are only one or two interesting story fragments to begin with?

Does anybody really like this book? In mean the art is great - wonderful page composition on the first three pages. But why don't they just add some f***** explanations or synopsis at the beginning so you get a hunch of an idea what's going on??? Do they realöly believe any fan can afford to spent the money to buy every DC Final Crisis Spin off and every other Dc book out there to get what's up with the DCU?

I'm angry, I I fear they won't be able to fix it any more...

[Jeff F]

Who is Father Time, and why is he working with Frankensteins Monster? What happened in Blüdhaven that is so bad? How did Barry Allen suddenly reappear? Who is Überfräulein and if she's German, why does she talk such nonsense? Who are the Tiger next to Marvel Jr. and the black Mister Miracle, and since when is there a new Aquaman?