FLASH #1
What did the
iFanboy
community think?
Pulls
Art, cover and variant cover by FRANCIS MANAPUL
Variant cover by TONY HARRIS
Size: 40 pages
Price: 3.99
It’s very rare for me to pick up a comic on art alone. Even when the greats like Frank Quitely, Ivan Reis, or others are involved; they still has a great writer to go alone for me to pick it up. This is the same case with Flash this week as we have Geoff Johns returning to his baby from so many years ago. Technically it is a fresh start for Johns as he’s now working with Barry Allen and not Wally West. But really, who cares about that when you have Francis Manapul as an artist?
I was a bit skeptical when Manapul was considered the artist for this title. He does beautiful work, don’t get me wrong, but I just didn’t see him work on a character like the Flash. Well this issue shut me up in a lot of ways. Where can I start but the first eleven pages of this? Seriously, Manapul showcases the speed of Allen very efficentally but also make it work with his style. That moment where Allen captures the goon’s bullet and then punches the window in a panel is where I feel in love. He does the speed right, the lighting effects beautifully, the speed lines are amazing as well, and just in general he paces the character amazingly well. How about the opening shot of Coast City with the traffic speeding in the distance? Little touches like that make me appreciate the art more. The stuff where Allen is working as a CSI looks great too. Slight hitches here or there with faces, his Allen off costume looks a bit iffy to me if I’m honest. Every character looks unique though and the detail in the backgrounds is great.
What disappoints me this issue is the writing in this. With this and Brightest Day #0 I’m starting to wonder if it’s me not liking his writing as much. Or maybe Johns is in a bit of a funk. Either way the disappointment for me in this issue is the writing itself. He handles the beginning chase scene well but really it’s Manapul that makes it work. The stuff with Allen reconnecting with his work and friends was just…..well felt like a beginniner’s work to me. His co-workers are stereotypical of any cop drama and in general it was a bit too much exposition. That’s to be expected in any first issue, but usually Johns is great at making it interesting for seasoned readers. This felt a bit too much for new readers and with that I got a bit bored with Johns laying on the exposition too thick. Then we get to the end of the issue and I won’t spoil it but I’m sorry; just did not make me interesting at all.
With this issue it brings the question of: Is the comic justifible to buy on the art alone? As of right now yes…..oh god yes everyone should pick this up. You can tell Francis Manapul is going to do magical stuff with this series in the future. If it’s anything like the first half of this comic, then it’s only going to get better from here. The writing though, unless your a new reader, is going to be a bit boring with too much exposition. Not much of a deal breaker but again I expected a bit more from a seasoned writer like Geoff Johns. Overall though this is a solid new start for the Flash. Let’s see where this takes us.
*Oh and who wants to bet that Forrest will die within a year? He’s like the generic buddy that dies in any action film. He even has pension and a fancy boat to retire on. Yeah….*
Art: 5 - Excellent
Find us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
Subscribe to our RSS Feed
Some rights reserved.
Nice review.
Nice, sobering review. Barry’s been back for a year (of our time) now, and he’s just reconnecting with friends? lol. I’m glad I’m not reading this. The whole setup sounds completely predictable, right down to the generic supporting cast that’s, like you said, right out of a generic tv show.
Is a comic worth buying for art alone? Oh yeah. I loved buying Ultimates 3 just for Madureira, even though his art wasn’t perfect. And I’ve bought a ton of Chris Bachalo comics over the years even though the stories kind of stunk. There’s definitely no shame in finding an artist whose work you love so much you’d follow it anyway. Honestly, I’m actually jealous of people who find so much in Manapul. Because it’s always great to find an artist you love so much that you’d follow them anywhere. Despite my problems with Johns lately, I’d GLADLY buy this (or Brightest Day) if one of my favorite artists was on art duties.
@flapjaxx I’m sorta fine with Johns doing this for the first issue. You always gotta introduce the cast in a #1. But for a Johns comic it just wasn’t interesting and it felt generic. Hopefully Johns can make these characters shine in future issues.
I think you should look up what "exposition" means, because I don’t think it means what you think it does. It’s not simply a case of being too wordy (which I don’t think this issue was at all), but when a comic has a problem with too much exposition, it means when the author has the characters just over-narrate everything that is going on. The plot grinds to a halt because it is just characters talking about what is happening, and nothing else happens. When novelists try and leap into comics, they usually run into this problem. That’s simply because the things that make a good novel and good comic are different, and while having a character explain every detail of what is going on in a novel may work, it comes across as clunky in a comic. Cry For Justice had this problem, as did Invincible Returns and Death Note in a few places. This doesn’t. It was dialog heavy, but it moved the plot along. Over-exposition doesn’t apply here.
@comicbookchris: There was a lot of secondary characters explaining what was happening and very little plot progession happened here. Sounds like too much exposition to me.
@TNC: Examples please? I’m not understanding your criticism. 🙂
I’m sorry man, but that is just incorrect. Just because you have two characters talking, that doesn’t make it exposition. That’s just dialog.
@comic/jupiter: Just the scenes in the CCPD felt all exposition. Explaining what is going on, who everyone is, what everyone stands for. It just felt like there is too much information to get me situated with this comic.
I get it, some of the people for the department are lazy and the Rouges are bad news. Don’t need a good chunk of this issue explaining that to us.
@TNC If by "Good Chunk" you mean 8 pages out of 42 adless (Well, two inhouse ads early in the issue to make room for the splash page) pages that’s really not that much. In a 22 page, comic yeah that would be a lot of real estate, but here… not so much. 20-% of the issue being exposition and the rest being action is a good mix.
@Prax: Wait there’s about 29 pages here with the actual issue. (I’m taking out the ads and previews just to focus on the actual comic) You’re right it’s about 8 pages focused on exposition to get the reader informed so…..Doing the math….that’s about 28% of the comic is exposition.
Again that doesn’t sound bad and it still isn’t a ‘good chunk’ like I mentioned. Still I just found that the issue sorta dragged a bit by those pages. I was enjoying the comic before that, and once the fake MM stuff happened. I would’ve enjoyed the reveal a bit more at the end if the exposition didn’t bog this down.
I don’t personally consider it exposition if the dialog feels natural. There has to be exposition in every story, otherwise the reader is completely lost. You just got to make the exposition "part" of the story. In this case I feel it was. The characters are talking about very relvant things and establishing themselves in the cast. Additionally the scene was about Barry returning to work. So the characters catching up makes sense. it’s not forced at all. If they were only there to indicate what’s going on, then yes. But the exposition actually helped build the scene and the world of the story here.
I’m deciding to disagree with this particular criticism.
I understand there has to be exposition of any kind in a comic, especially a #1 issue.
Usually Geoff Johns makes it interesting but here he didn’t for me.
@comicbookchris: You and Jumpingjupiter are certainly welcome to your opinion that there is not too much exposition. I felt the book had a nice flow, as well. But to claim, because you don’t agree that the book is exposition-heavy, that tnc uses the term incorrectly is misguided. Dialog can absolutely be exposition. And is in this case. Again, I find it very well written exposition. But it is exposition.
I was more refering to the claims that there was too much of it, which I don’t agree with. I probably should have worded my last comment a bit better to clarify that. But yeah, basically what I was saying that just because something is heavy in dialog, that in of itself a problem, and shouldn’t be labeled as over-exposition. Just as you said, everything had a nice flow to it. Every convo had a meaning and moved things along, and nothing felt superfluous.
@ Akamuu: I think I was clear that yes, this story has exposition: "You just got to make the exposition "part" of the story". My contest is with the statement that the exposition is intrusive which is what the reviewer was implying: "Johns laying on the exposition too thick".
I completely agree that it was exposition and never stated the term exposition was used incorrectly, but I am arguing that it was "too thick". I am of the opinion that the exposition in thsi story is rather subtle and natural. In fact Johns used the exposition to build the scene and flesh out characters.
@comicbookchris: You straight up told tnc "I think you should look up what "exposition" means, because I don’t think it means what you think it does." and "that is just incorrect. Just because you have two characters talking, that doesn’t make it exposition. That’s just dialog." But he was totally correct in calling it exposition. There was a lot of expository dialog between characters. Again, I didn’t feel it was too much exposition. I thought it was handled very well. But it’s still exposition.
@Jumpingjupiter: "I don’t personally consider it exposition if the dialog feels natural." was the statement that led me to believe you thought he was using the term incorrectly.
True, I expressed that ambiguously. I should have put exposition in quotations there. "Exposition" in the common way it’s understood, ie. obtrusive "catch-up" dialog and I think that’s the way TNC was meaning it in his review.
Semantics I suppose…
I probably worded it a bit wrong, so let me try another way to explain what I think: Say if we were all watching A Better Tomorrow, and I say that the movie was bad because there was no character development. Naturally, you would all tell me that I was wrong, and that there was nothing wrong with it. You would also question my sense of character development, as I am the sense of over-exposition.
Uhm, dude, did Akamuu hurt your feelings or something?