flapjaxx

July 29, 2013 7:27 pm Yeah, I definitely hear you guys. I got out of comics in 1999, and I dipped my toe back into the water from time to time, but it was Morrison's Batman (along with Whedon's Astonishing X-Men) that really pulled me back in. And from 2007 or 2010, Morrison's Batman basically did "define my comics readership". It was the one thing I really cared most about reading, by a mile. It ruled my comics life. As cosmo said above, my interest also started to wane with the first volume of Incorporated. It felt very much 'tacked on' -- just something fun for Morrison to do. The REAL story, I felt, definitely concluded with Batman & Robin #16, with Bruce's return. The first few issues of Incorporated (vol. 1) were fun, but they didn't seem to have much substance to them. As that volume wore on, though, I definitely think there were some great issues in which it was evident that Morrison was putting in real effort and trying to "say" something about Batman, as much as he ever did in his previous runs on "Batman" and "B&R". I think that Inc (vol. 1) #4, the spotlight on the first Batwoman, was particularly impressive -- possibly one of the top 5 single issues of the whole saga to date. But when Batman Inc returned in the New 52? Something was missing. Before then, I had been skeptical about Inc, but by the end of vol. 1, and with the excellent "Leviathan Strikes!" one-shot in recent memory, I was ready to care about this title to the same extent that I used to care about Morrison's Batman a few years previous. Overall, though, Inc vol. 2 has let me down. There's no other way to say it. I've still enjoyed it. It's still had excellent single issues here and there (#2 and #5 especially). But, overall, more often than not this title has felt too crowded and too action-y for too long. It's also felt too linear for too long; it's just . . . not as interesting. Morrison's Batman stuff used to have me pouring over back issues ten times over, looking for clues and references and allusions. I haven't had much cause to do any of that in a long time. It's not nearly as deep as it once was. Maybe this last issue will change my mind about Inc vol. 2. But I think it will be a case of "too little, too late". (As others have said, I really wish they -- Morrison and DC both -- would have gone all-out on this, given us a huge $4.99 or even $7.99 issue, full of all sorts of stuff, so that it would feel like the culmination of 7 years' work, rather than the 20-page conclusion of a decompressed action movie.) Overall, Morrison's Batman saga is still my favorite run of all time, and will remain so no matter what the last issue brings. Overall, I think it's THE best. But that's despite a full THIRD of it now (Inc vols. 1 & 2) seeming borderline disposable. For the last few years, it's been fun . . . but a far cry from the really innovative and insightful storytelling that Morrison did, month in and month out, in "The Black Glove", "R.I.P.", "Last Rites", and most issues of "B&R". 75% of those issues were better than 75% of the comics with "Batman Incorporated" on the cover. There HAS been a decline. The older stories really made me think hard and really gave new insights into the character who was ALREADY the most deconstructed and analyzed character in comics (Bruce Wayne). Don't get me wrong, Inc vol. 2 has still been "good", but psycho rampaging Bruce, buckets of blood and vitriol, and evil and/or dead children just . . . don't do it for me the way previous, more nuanced installments of this saga have. Still, when I think of the greatest runs in Big Two comic history (the most 'literary' runs, even) I think of Alan Moore's Swamp Thing, Neil Gaiman's Sandman, and Grant Morrison's Batman. Those are clearly the top three, imo. Not necessarily in that order. No matter what, it's been a great ride, and I don't expect to give Inc #13 anything less than a 4.

July 29, 2013 7:06 pm Two things: I strongly, strongly, STRONGLY recommending reading "52" #30 and #47 as the "start" of Morrison's Batman run. Those issues are where we see Bruce isolating himself in the cave, the redux of the "isolation experiment" that was originally conducted on Bruce by Doctor Hurt so many years before. It baffles me why DC has never included the 8-10 relevant pages of those two issues at the beginning of the Batman by Morrison collections. Additionally, Morrison's "Batman: Gothic" from the '90s definitely ties in on a very strong thematic note. Lines of dialogue pertaining to "the Devil" reappear in Morrison's Batman run, as do some of the other themes. In contrast, Morrison's "Arkham Asylum" doesn't really feel like it's "of a piece" with his other Batman stuff. But "Batman: Gothic" is as close to being "part of the story" as possible, without actually being part of the story. P.S. And if some huge omnibus ever collects all of "Morrison's Batman", I think it should also include Batman & Robin #0 by Pete Tomasi. That really fits in with what Grant did with Damian.

July 29, 2013 6:40 pm It's between this and Kingdom Come, I think, for Waid's best work. I've always thought of him as a "very good" writer, but I can't think of any (what I would call) "classics" besides those two works. I really liked his Flash and Cap stuff, but they seem... workmanlike compared to KC and DD. It's strange, because in the '90s I used to think of Waid and Kurt Busiek in the same breath, because they seemed to come on the scene doing good stuff at the Big Two around the same time. And I think that they're both really good writers of comparable abilities. But Busiek just seems to have more "classics" than Waid does. I guess Busiek has more subpar work too, to balance it out, whereas Waid always hits for a fairly high average. If that makes sense? But, in terms of DD runs? Psssh. I think Miller's stuff is leagues beyond Waid's, I'm sorry. I appreciate Waid's run a LOT, I REALLY like it, but I don't think it touches Miller's stuff. I'd rate Bendis's DD above Waid's as well. So maybe Waid's run is the third best. But even then I don't think that Waid has one DD collection that can match Kevin Smith's "Guardian Devil". There's just SO much good DD stuff out there. Except for Batman, I think Daredevil is the character is the most amount of "classic" trades and storylines. Waid's work here is certainly in good company.

July 28, 2013 8:27 am @Paul: Hm, okay, interesting. You didn't phrase it that incoherently. I guess I was just interpreted the sentence as if it meant that Iron Man 3 was ALREADY the "runner up" before Wolverine entered the race. Looking forward to seeing the movie in the theater soon. And... Your comment there has me imagining Iron Men and Usain Bolt racing.

July 27, 2013 4:33 pm "Oh, we don’t talk unless it’s through lawyers. ... Josh said it looks too scary." Hilarious! "It might be the best comic book movie of the year, though a sharp and sudden nosedive in its third act keeps it about on par with runner up Iron Man 3." I feel stupid asking this, but what was #1, then? I know you didn't like Man of Steel, so... does Star Trek count as a comic book movie, or are we counting the Dark Knight Returns Part Two animated thing?

July 25, 2013 8:12 pm I read this issue a while ago, and if I remember right this was in conjunction with promoting Welles' movie "Black Magic". In the comic, he appears in his likeness for the costuming in that movie.

July 22, 2013 10:20 pm Deodato's art has been great lately. I thought I'd miss Epting, and I do, but... Deodato has been exceeding expectations. I haven't read much of his work in recent years, but in the '90s I enjoyed his stuff. I don't think he gets enough credit overall.

July 22, 2013 10:17 pm Yeah, all the issues have been pushed back. Next three are now scheduled for mid-September, late-October, late-November. The wait is gonna kill me! The annual should be awesome, though!

July 22, 2013 2:36 pm "If they keep slugging out crappy events that won’t mean squat in 6 weeks, then people WILL forget and stop buying them." In a weird way, I think that the very fact that the events are forgettable is what makes people keep falling for them so hard every time. And, yeah, I agree with Jim's main point: Hype works. I often hear people complain about advertising and commercials on TV by saying things like "Commercials never convince me to buy anything. They're just wasting their money paying for hype." But I think that advertising and hype usually work on a more subtle level. The excitement of consumers rarely equals the excitement projected by the commercials or whatever, but the point is just to bring public awareness to what you're trying to sell.

July 21, 2013 12:07 pm Very strange. I definitely don't object to Ultron being used. He's more of a classic Avengers foe than Thanos. But... why "Age of"? An entire "Age"? An alternate reality? A chapter of history? As a character, Ultron is already convoluted, but they're going to compound his appearance by exploring some sort of Ultron-run reality? In the midst of introducing Quicksilver, Scarlett Witch, and others (Pym?)? It better be a three-hour movie, for all of that to work well together. They already had a huge cast, but at least they had sewn the seeds of a fight with Thanos. The funniest thing about all this: I wonder how many curious fans of the film will pick up the AoU collection, simply because it has the same title as the upcoming film? They're in for an awfully confusing, unpleasant surprise once they crack that baby open.