CBR's Top 100 Comics of 2012, #49 - 25

[passer-by]

Have to disagree on that, I feel it was a bit too high on the list. Because the latest stories have been nothing to write home about.

And Saga better be among the top ten.

Saga will most probably be a top 10 title, it's received widespread praise ever since #1 - and deservedly so.



As for Morning Glories, I think the stories remain very interesting, but some people complain about the change of focus from the Glories to the Truants or the fact that some questions are still unanswered while new ones arise.

I don't mind that, it's a gradually developing large tapestry with many elements and I'm looking forward to the day when I'll reread this book in its entirety. Nick Spencer talks about it in the MG thread in the Image forum btw, and explains his approach to the story he's telling. ;)

It remains my favourite of the four ongoings I'm still reading, soon to be three after February. :(

[dupont2005]

Will the final list be posted today or Monday?

[Leocomix]

49. Prince of Cats
48. Sweet Tooth
47. Empowered
46. Journey Into Mystery
45. The Punisher & Punisher War Zone
44. A Game For Swallos
43. Wizzywig
42. Little White Duck
41. Conan The Barbarian
40. Mind MGMT
39. Lose
38. The Self-Published Comics of Michel Fiffe
37. Blade of The Immortal
36. Jennifer Blood
35. Love & Rockets: New Stories
34. Goliath
33. Morning Glories
32. Thief of Thieves
31. Dial H
30. The Zaucer of Zilk
29. Chew
28. Batwoman
27. The Boys
26. The Massive
25. Revival

A few more titles that I follow. Glad to see JenniferBlood here. Batwoman isn't that good. I've dropped Morning Glories and read only one issue of Mind Mgmt. Glory deserved better.

[benday-dot]

Will the final list be posted today or Monday?

The article says the next batch will be posted Sunday, January 30th, which I presume is an error and should read December. I suspect the final segment, or the top 10, will show up Monday or be split between Monday and Tuesday.

[Trilipush]

Well, JIM ought to be higher than any of these, and the fact that it's ranked below **BATWOMAN**, a comic which immediately turned into total trash this year when Williams took an arc off and the brain-stabbing emptiness of the writing became apparent without his art to disguise it, is a borderline insult.

Those are strong words, despite the fact that Batwoman #0 was one of the better written zero issues in the New 52 this year, managing to flesh out the main protagonist's motivations and struggles in a way that profoundly defined her as a character, both as Batwoman and Kate Kane. Despite the current arc topping the highly revered first arc, using the partnership between Batwoman and Wonder Woman in a way that transcends the usual tropes in comic book stories involving superhero team-ups. A lot of Wonder Woman fans even stated that this version of their super heroine was one of the best interpretations they've seen even outside the New 52. Drown the World's non-linear style was an experiment that failed, but it all makes sense if you bothered to reread the whole arc. The latest issue provided an in-depth exploration of Maggie Sawyer's character, touching relevant issues such as homosexuality, religion, and other modes of societal dissonance in just 20 pages. And all of these are done in a prose style that is nothing short of finesse.

Brushing off a piece of work without giving it a fair shake is a borderline insult.

[Jeremi]

As for Morning Glories, I think the stories remain very interesting, but some people complain about the change of focus from the Glories to the Truants or the fact that some questions are still unanswered while new ones arise.

I don't mind that, it's a gradually developing large tapestry with many elements and I'm looking forward to the day when I'll reread this book in its entirety. Nick Spencer talks about it in the MG thread in the Image forum btw, and explains his approach to the story he's telling. ;)

It remains my favourite of the four ongoings I'm still reading, soon to be three after February. :(

I just think it lost its focus somewhere half way through. I'll probably stick around to the end but I don't anticipate reading it as much as when it first hit the shelves, and Nick Spencer's other books in Marvel and DC have left a lot to be desired.

[Ottmeister X]

I didn't like the second arc, but the current arc should have earned Batwoman a spot in the top 20 at least. It's better written than DoTF, imho.

Maybe I'm wrong in not knowing enough about JH's writing skills, but it feels like the same case as McFarlane: great artist attempting to write great stories and falling way short.

[Trilipush]

Maybe I'm wrong in not knowing enough about JH's writing skills, but it feels like the same case as McFarlane: great artist attempting to write great stories and falling way short.

In case you forgot, JH Williams is co-writing the series with W. Haden Blackman, a writer who has long worked in the Star Wars universe and who did an excellent job of it. Also, read my most recent post in this thread in reply to Chris McFeely. Fact of the matter is, both JH Williams III and W. Haden Blackman have proven that they're more than capable of dishing out excellently written stories. If you're going to brush off the writing just because JH Williams III is only a "great artist," then I don't know what else to say.

[Chris McFeely]

To say I'm brushing it off without giving it a chance is to imply I didn't read it. I read it all the way up through the second arc - that is to say, eight of the twelve issues released this year - and dropped it like a hot rock after that mess. Perhaps the third arc is good - that, I don't know. But all I know from giving this book a year of my life is that the stories have been very empty things that I realised I was willing to excuse when the art was as fantastic as it was for the first six. Reeder's normally excellent but was just did not cut it on the second (that she left because of "differences" said to me that she was artistically micro-managed into doing pages as Williams would have done them, which tried to create a consistent visual identity for the book with an artist who wasn't up to it), and the entire experience for the second six months of my reading it was a dull, boring, messy time that I decided without regret that I wanted no more of.

[Ottmeister X]

To say I'm brushing it off without giving it a chance is to imply I didn't read it. I read it all the way up through the second arc - that is to say, eight of the twelve issues released this year - and dropped it like a hot rock after that mess. Perhaps the third arc is good - that, I don't know. But all I know from giving this book a year of my life is that the stories have been very empty things that I realised I was willing to excuse when the art was as fantastic as it was for the first six. Reeder's normally excellent but was just did not cut it on the second (that she left because of "differences" said to me that she was artistically micro-managed into doing pages as Williams would have done them, which tried to create a consistent visual identity for the book with an artist who wasn't up to it), and the entire experience for the second six months of my reading it was a dull, boring, messy time that I decided without regret that I wanted no more of.

I concur with this sentiment. I gave Batwoman $40-$50 worth of money. The first story arc kept me along but then took a big dive in quality. Yes, JHW's art is a big factor, on whether he's doing it or not, and if he's not then the story had better be damn good. Sadly, it wasn't.

[Trilipush]

But to imply implicitly that Williams and Blackman can't write worth a darn just because of a single arc is not giving it a fair shake. Even great writers, in their attempts to experiment (the non-linear method used in the 2nd arc for Batwoman is clearly an experiment), dish out terrible stories from time to time. I saw the second arc for the experiment that it was, and knowing that the next one won't use the same method, I gave the title another chance and was blown away. And no, the team redeemed the title not just in 4 issues, but in 5. You forgot to factor in Batwoman #0, which, as I stated before, was one of the best written issues in zero month.

[Ottmeister X]

But to imply implicitly that Williams and Blackman can't write worth a darn just because of a single arc is not giving it a fair shake. Even great writers, in their attempts to experiment (the non-linear method used in the 2nd arc for Batwoman is clearly an experiment), dish out terrible stories from time to time. I saw the second arc for the experiment that it was, and knowing that the next one won't use the same method, I gave the title another chance and was blown away. And no, the team redeemed the title not just in 4 issues, but in 5. You forgot to factor in Batwoman #0, which, as I stated before, was one of the best written issues in zero month.

However, to make a top whatever list of the year the entire body of work should be outstanding. In my opinion, Batwoman shouldn't have been rated this high. It was also rated too high last year if I recall correctly. Only the first three issues had made year's end and people were claiming greatness.

I hope the title is successful but it wasn't worth my dime any longer.

[Trilipush]

You still didn't read the succeeding issues after the second arc, so you won't have a solid basis for judging whether the series deserved its spot or not. Both the story and art for issues 11-15 and 0 were that good to warrant it at least a spot in the lower 20's. If it weren't for the second arc, Batwoman would have earned a spot even in the lower top 10. And I'd like to think I'm sophisticated enough of a comics reader to have made a fair assessment of the series as a whole for the entire year.