Spider-Man: Down Among the Dead

[Pencilero]

I saw this at the library while looking for some foreign language dictionaries, and decided to give it a whirl. I like Terry Dodson's art, even if I don't approve of the nu-Black Cat look.

I didn't know this was a Marvel Knights title. Which basically means another fragmentation of the core Spiderman product, leaning towards the "mature" audience. This translates directly to a dreary color pallet and some sexual innuendo.

Aside from Dodson's art, I can't say I liked much about this book. This is the second thing from Millar I've read, the other being The Ultimates, and I don't get all the hullabaloo surrounding this guy. He reminds me of a cut rate Alan Moore for some reason. Probably because The Ultimates just seemed to borrow heavily from Watchmen, and he fills his books with inane pop culture references that I don't get.

Dodson's art was quite tasty, even if Peter looked Asian in some panels, and there was some other random weirdness with the characters. Electro's new suit is kind of neat though.

All in all, it's just another brick in the Corporate Comic Wall. Glad I didn't pay money for it.

I'll wash the taste of this one out of my mouth with The Goon TPB I also loaned. Hopefully it's as good as I've heard.

Na razie,

Greg

[misfitX]

it still beats brian hudlin and billy tan's MK:Spider-Man by leaps and astronomical bounds.

[Pencilero]

it still beats brian hudlin and billy tan's MK:Spider-Man by leaps and astronomical bounds.

In my estimation, that's picking the turd with more corn in it at a turd buffet; and frankly - I'm not into scat. ;)

Na razie,

Greg

[Norman B8s]

This may be just me Gag2, but I really don't think your review provided much information for those of us like myself who haven't read it. I have little reason to doubt your opinion since I've experienced first-hand the butchering that goes on in the Spidey titles (or most of the other Marvel titles for that matter) but what exactly about Millar's storytelling in "Down With The Dead" is so bad that you wouldn't recommend it to the rest of us?


Aside from Dodson's art, I can't say I liked much about this book. doesn't really constitute as a review.


and there was some other random weirdness with the characters. What do you mean, man? Explain, explain! That's the stuff of good reviews.

[misfitX]

i loved Millar's and Dodson's and Cho's MK:Spider-man. the story line was complicated but fun. the main plot lasted for twelve issues with three mini-plots contained withen. i don't know if the MK imprint isn't really part of the Marvel Universe since Hudlin's book has Spidey in with the New Avengers (ugh).

as far as a reveiw on hudlin and tan's spider-man, i'll direct you here (http://www.penciljack.com/forum/showthread.php?t=58476)

[Pencilero]

What do you mean, man? Explain, explain! That's the stuff of good reviews.

In a nutshell - Peter and Mary Jane help Aunt May move. Aunt May is then kidnapped and Peter spends the rest of the book calling in favors and hunting down May.

Y'know - If I'm not mistaken this story has been done, several times in Spiderman's 40 year history. Only now there's the implication that Electro may, or may not, like taking a shot to the brown-eye every now and then.

There's not much more to it than that.

Another failing of this graphic novel, which seems to be common for Corporate Comic men-in-tights collections is that it doesn't collect an entire story arc. So, much like reading the monthly issues, you're left with a cliffhanger ending, which I'm not completely compelled to bother seeking out the conclusion to. Perhaps I just read too many Vertigo collections? They seem to do a fair job of collecting all of the relevant material in one location for my reading convenience.

Hope that gives you a better explanation of the book. But if I'm being called on this discussion just because I didn't care for it enough to wax poetic over it, I have to ask - where in the hell are we supposed to post comic book discussion without folks getting irritable about it? :confused:

Na razie,

Greg

[Norman B8s]

Hope that gives you a better explanation of the book. But if I'm being called on this discussion just because I didn't care for it enough to wax poetic over it, I have to ask - where in the hell are we supposed to post comic book discussion without folks getting irritable about it?

Perhaps you should't post if you don't care to elaborate.
Simply stating "it sucks" and then walking away doesn't seem to be much of a convincing argument.

On a side note: What does "Na razie" mean?

[Pencilero]

"Na razie" is "see you later / goodbye" in Polish. ;)


Perhaps you should't post if you don't care to elaborate.
Simply stating "it sucks" and then walking away doesn't seem to be much of a convincing argument.

I don't know what to say. Being a comic book fan is sort of like being in an abusive relationship, or being Tina Turner. You know Ike is bad for you, you know he's going to beat you, but you still go back to him.

I didn't pick this book up expecting to come here and take a dump on it. I was holding out the faint hope that the book would be interesting, or do the character justice - sort of like the Ennis / Dillon run on the Punisher. Unfortunately this was just a slightly more "mature" take on an old story told more than once in the long pseudo-history of Spiderman.

The problem being these characters are fatherless. The people who created them are long gone, or have since lost all rights to their creations, and these big companies are just turning out book after book to milk the property for all it's worth, without really paying much attention to the issue of the character's growth.

It would be one thing if like Gold Digger, which I stopped reading almost ten years ago, which I picked up recently to discover familiar faces were pregnant. Background characters were now playing a more prominent role, and new faces were being introduced. The difference here is Fred Perry owns Gold Digger and is the only person to work on it, unless he approves a side story or special series.

Peter Parker will never age. Aunt May will never die. Mary Jane will never get pregnant. If any of this happens, it will conveniently be undone at some point in the future for the sake of "rebooting" the franchise and making it relevant to the times. These characters don't grow beyond the boundaries put in place by the suits running the company.

So as a reader, I was quite disappointed to find Spiderman: Down Among the Dead was just the same stuff I read 15 years ago with a fresh coat of paint, and some sexual innuendo.

Yeah, I should have known better.

This discussion just makes me want to read Spawn #10 again, and I'm hoping it's every bit as good as I remember it being. I think Dave Sims put a fine point on the topic I'm discussing with that issue.

Na razie,

Greg

[misfitX]

look greg, i know that you understand corporate comics. i also know that you understand that there are other choices out there. hell if you like the teenage super-hero thing then go look at Invincible, that's probably the best book out there in that sub-genre and it's characters grow and evolve. they deal with real issues, and have yet to be rebooted.
the appeal to me of spider-man and superman and batman isn't the long coninuity that has to be thrown in there every friggin' issue, it's the good story with compelling characters. failing that, i won't pick the book up. Now i do love continuity, i think it's great. but sometimes i miss pre-crisis DC with all the willy-nilly universes. continuity can tend to bog the crap out of things.
i remember a thread a while ago that had some pointers for the comic book comunity (from some guy's blog, someone help me out here) in it he said, If a comic's not good, don't buy it. I'm not knocking you for getting this trade and expecting something from it. It just seems like you tend to go to corporate comics and expect them to fall in line with the indies. Marvel's not gonna drop their flag ship because Stan Lee and Steve Ditko aren't writing/drawing it anymore. (in fact they'd probably drop if they still were). it still sells. I picked up MK:Spidey for the sole reason that i didn't expect any coninuit problems. i mean i haven't regularly read spider-man since the clone fiasco (and when and how the hell did aunt may come back to life? was it a clone?)
anyways, if you know what to expect from corp. comics, don't come in here and whine about them. i hope every once in while a character i like will come back (or some that i don't like will die) but i don't care that they don't that much. i'm not writing the books.
the thing to understand is that they're just characters. you can use them to tell a story continuity be damned. sure millar did something that's been done before, but he did it well. i really think you should read the rest of the series (because frankly, the first arc didn't impress me much either) but far warning, stop reading after issue 12. 13 is atrocious.

Edit: Greg, i know that you realize a lot of this stuff (i'm sure you know more than that too) i'm mostly directing this at others that troll around here as well. just kind of a tirade/rant thingie.

[Norman B8s]

I think the problem herein lies that Marvel (and perhaps other companies as well) is afraid to change the foundation of the book too much. I dropped Spider-Man right after the cowards at Marvel killed Ben Reilly, brought back Norman Osborn and made the Parker baby disappear (or die). Later I heard that Aunt May was brought back to life also, thus nullifying the importance of Spidey #400, one of the best and moving Spidey stories I've ever read. They hit the reset button and returned to the status quo most of the general public is familiar with. And the general public is what Marvel marketing is all about. You can't go confusing people who would possibly buy your books, now can you? Imagine the drop in sales!
It's pretty obvious that Spider-Man has gone almost everywhere he can and the series should just be axed, but that of course is never gonna happen. He's far too profitable. *tsk tsk*

[misfitX]

i disagree. spider-man has become an archtypical character. he can be put in any situation they wanted to do with him. he'll never get old as long as they don't let him. but marvel seems to be letting him. i think every once in a while the book should be reset, but they need to seperate it. amazing spider-man should be a story, spectacular should be another one. i don't like that i need to buy all these tie-in's to get the damn story. that should stop altogether. it's another marketing ploy that pisses me off the most.

and where did editor notes go? they always helped with that shit, but now i never see them anywhere...

[Pencilero]

Wow, it just dawned on me misfitX is just typing stream of consciousness style without reading anything that anybody posts before him. :P


i disagree. spider-man has become an archtypical character. he can be put in any situation they wanted to do with him.

A Spiderman for all seasons™!

- Spiderman teaches you about sex education!
- Spiderman teaches the legal system!
- Spiderman goes to the zoo!

No, what you're grappling with here is your sentimental attachment to the character. Which I think is part of why most folks who don't read comics view the fans as immature and infantile.


"When I was a child I spoke as a child I understood as a child I thought as a child; but when I became a man I put away childish things." I Cor. xiii. 11.

Now I'm not implying that Spiderman, or comic books are childish, I'm stating that the readership is. At some point, when Spiderman stops serving his purpose you have to move on, because The Corporations aren't going to stop publishing the book; and sooner or later they're going to completely f'up whatever fondness you had for that property - errr "character."

This discussion segues nicely into your "not getting the point of manga" thread.

We don't need a Spiderman for all seasons. What we need are other characters, books, and ideas that comic book readers can turn to once they get sick of the corporate shenanigans with their misappropriated properties.

I admit, Marvel and DC have a lot of Icons. More than a few I have a fondness for. It's a damned shame they drag them through the mud so often.

Na razie,

Greg

[DJ Kenobi]

Hey all. Let's play nice.

In Comics Analysis we were always hoping for some good, highbrow, critical discussion of comics. But then it seemed that some were unhappy with the restrictiveness of the forum, so I've loosened up a bit. And it only took about a week before it broke down into reviews that barely talk about the book and some just-short of name calling. So how about we all get back on track. Comics Analysis is for just that, the analysis of comics. I know that putting some real thought into a review takes a considerable amount of time and I never really expected the forum to catch fire. But I did hope for some good, intelligent discussion. I know we have smart people here, and many people here want to work in comics someday and come to PJ to improve their craft. The process of learning requires the critical analysis of the medium, be it writing or art. And that is what Comics Analysis is here for.

[Pencilero]

Sorry Kenobi.

I'm still a bit confused about the whole compartmentalization of Penciljack here.

Comic talk in this box.

Art talk in this box.

Midgets in this box.

I figured talking about Spiderman was more appropriate in here than in the Break Room. Feel free to lock or move this one as you see fit.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

On the other hand, wouldn't deconstructing this title as we've done this far fit under analysis? It's just not flattering.

Na razie,

Greg

[misfitX]

Wow, it just dawned on me misfitX is just typing stream of consciousness style without reading anything that anybody posts before him. :P

eh, that's how i work when there's all those letters all squished together like that...;)

no, seriously, you can veiw it as my having an immature attachment, whatever, that's what you see. i think that spider-man is an archtypal teen, its good stuff. i mean the powers are one thing, but his attitude and everything works real well as a teen (why is ultimate spider-man so popular?)

i think the beginning of this thread worked out fine as far as analysis. i just didn't agree so i presented an opposing veiw. greg doesn't agree so he threw back and it deteriorated from there.

as far as the childish quip goes that i'm gonna have to disagree a great deal against. people try to get rid of a lot of their childhood things when they 'grow up' but i don't think this is a good thing. you don't have to get rid of things to grow up, just add more to the plate.
as far as my attatchment to spider-man, i don't really have one. i think peter parker is a fun character and i like stuff like MK Spidey when it comes along, but for the most part i'm not that huge a fan of spider-man. out of the big names in comics i probably have about a dozen more issues of him than i do of Hulk (and that's not much). you can go on thinking what you like, no skin off my nose, just thought you'd like a little insight into my likes and dislikes before you went off assuming again ;)

and you're right, this does segue well into the whole 'manga' thread (sorry about my SOC but that's how i roll y'all) but i never said we should do away with characters. just diversify. i do think we should limit the number of titles a character gets. we don't need 4 spider books or 8 x books or twenty seven with wolverine [guest]starring in 'em. like i said above, we don't need to get rid of everything to change, just add and change. it's not that hard.