Marvel Flipside

Worst Marvel Cover: October

So many covers, while not being truly BAD, are surely BLAH. Many fans have been lamenting this for years, a product of a corporate policy that engenders generic poses that are interchangeable and therefore unremarkable.

Here's a cover that's a little bit better than simply a pose of the assembled characters, but not by much. It's Dark Avengers #10, by Mike Deodato, in stores 10/ 21.

The "bit better" is that there is some attitude in the posing, and some suggestion of a story. I mean, don't you want to know what they are all looking at? Chances are, it HAS to be one of the countless heroes who've promised to take down Norman Osborn once and for all, right? (Not that that narrows it down at all-- note the sarcasm.)

But on all other accounts, the cover is just lifeless and dead. Look at the thumbnail! It's just a big blur of blah colors, muted and muddled together with no clear direction for the viewer's eye nor any focal point at all. And that's WITH a character with a golden costume, several characters with shiny elements/armor, AND a glowing grate beneath them all!

Perhaps they didn't want to draw your eye in at all-- because if you do, you realize that virtually every character has a curious absence of lower limbs. Some of that could be foreshortening, like, *maybe* Marvel Boy's, but what about Ares? Where is his body below the knee? And what happened to Karla Marvel's right leg? I imagine that the reason all of these are missing is because the background is actually not appropriate to fit everyone on proportionately. That's probably also why the Sentry and MacGargan-Spider-Man seem more pasted in than actually interacting with the environment. In other words, shouldn't there be depth in between the fire escape and the ladder? Or between the the landing and whatever bricky-thing the Sentry is on? 

Good rendering never excuses poor layout. Sorry, Deodato, just ask Brian Hitch!

Best Marvel Cover: October

There's a lot of great stuff out there this month! As our runners-up will show, this ranges from the abstract and cartoony (Deadpool #900 by Dave Johnson) to the fully rendered and painterly (Guardians of the Galaxy #19 by Alex Garner).

But there's one style of cover that I want to see more of-- and that's the cover that works as pure design overall. Something happened a little while ago, where the way we manipulate images and color and design has both been simplified and complicated at the same time thanks to our embrace of the digital world-- consumer products, commercials, movie posters, book covers, even T-shirts, all have changed to be playful but purposeful in their design. So why are comic books still having the same generic pose of a hero and/or a static freeze frame?

To be fair, there's some of this spirit to be found (as I've said before, mostly on the fringe products like Marvel's Noir line) and I'll usually seek out those covers right away for the "Best" candidates. After all, there's something to be said if these kinds of covers immediately catch my eye with an inaudible "hey!" of interest as I pass by image after image of Standard Poses 1 through 5.

 And that brings us to Nomad: Girl Without a World #2, cover by Rafael Alberquerque, on sale Oct. 14.  At first, it may seem like an odd choice, because it's certainly not a headlining title (the whole "Nomad, Girl Without a World"  already an odd choice for a title in the first place,) but this cover has a lot of what I was talking about above.

First of all, the colors and the images world beautifully together to make it an eye-pleasing arrangement. There's competing angles from the figures, the buildings' perspective, and the lines in the background/sky. It's unifying but also dramatic, and yet it doesn't lose the viewer's eye, keeping it centered.

But overall it's the colors that are the most subtle and, paradoxically, the most effective. Notice there are only three colors: Red, white, and blue. Even the shadows are not black but a different shade of blue. The red and the white are also striped, reminiscent of the flag, but the lines are not straight. The jagged lines help lend the air of urgency and disruption, especially in contrast to the solid areas of color and straight lines of the building. Thus, the colors/lines work thematically, too. Nomad is a character who is supposed to be a patriotic hero (red, white, and blue) but is without a world and direction in life (the jagged/broken flag and dichotomy between disruption and solid areas.)

What could have been really cool, would be to incorporate a star somehow in the billboard/logo where the "--IS" stands.Or maybe that'd be over the top and ruining the subtlety that makes this the Best winner.

From the Message Boards: Villain Revamps

Lurking on the message boards at comicbookresources, I came across this poll/thread: Which villain needs a revamp?

At the time of my post here, Thanos is at the top spot, although it's just 12 out of 29 votes. Nefaria and the Serpent Society trail just behind with 11 and 10, respectively.

Thanos certainly was a great villain, back in the day, wasn't he? Here was a guy who worshiped Death, literally. But because it was the cosmic skeleton-lady version, Thanos was equal parts serial murderer and philosohper, meaning you could have some pretty big hero-villain beatdowns PLUS a heady dose of trippiness. But the problem with Thanos is that... well, he became "cool." Or, in more English-class speak, he became an anti-hero, and you can't spell anti-hero without "hero." Instead of worshipping Death, he seemed more interested in "cosmic balance" or somesuch-- whatever vague abstract thing that could allow Thanos to put weird machinations in motion but still seem to be working for the double big "g:" Greater Good.

Plus, let's face it, one of the most satisfying things a villain brings to the story is the fact that the villain will eventually be taken down by the hero, the harder the better. Every once in a while, a villain might reveal that it was "his plan all along," or the hero might learn it was a Pyrrhic victory, or insert-cool-twist-ending here where the villain escapes said Take Down. This has been happening with Thanos for far too long.

Thus, Thanos needs two things: he needs to once again be big, bad, and Downright Creepy, and he needs no other recourse but to be Taken Down Hard.

Those are my suggestions, as vague as they are. I'll try to come up with some answers for the Thanos Question (and others in the poll) throughout the week.

What The--?! Marvel Cover: September

Spider-Cupid?!

Seriously. Spider-Cupid!?

Way to lightbox that baby and STILL make it look like there's a disembodied right hand.

Worst Marvel Cover: September

Okay, Lafuente, what are you doing to me? I was all set to give you the Worst award in the SAME MONTH you earn the Best? Tsk, Tsk. Honestly, what are you trying to do here, with Ultimate Comics Spider-Man? Did they pay you for a full cover when all they did was PhotoShop one of your pin-ups over and over? Or maybe it's you coloring/arranging your own covers? In which case, kudos on the Runaways (despite your affinity for glows), but can you settle down on something more sophisticated for the flagship of the Ultimate Comics line?

But because I gave you the same award for the same comic LAST month, I'll have to give it to another Wolverine comic, instead. Here's Wolverine: Origins #40, cover by Doug Braithwaite, on sale Sept. 23.

Overall, the thing's a bit of a mess, isn't it? There's just one swash of overall color, a pale yellow and/or orange, a color that personally turns me off for comics covers. The whole thing is divided on a half diagonal, placing a focal point squarely in the center. Where's the variation? Where's the golden mean? And more importantly, where's the differentiation? Things just blur together here, with very little distinction between the hands of Romulus and the figure of Wolverine.

And then there's the anatomy. Not too bad on first glance, but strange if you notice the weird pinch at Wolvie's forearm/bicep-- like he's a scarecrow and not flesh and blood. And Rommie's hand seems to be hiding a distortedly bloated head there-- unless R's hand should be wrapping around the form better. The worst part is the sword-- I'm not sure that's really the correct form. Because not only is it hard to wield in a fight, but it seems to bend the laws of physics at W's hand-- three-dimensional space be damned! And what exactly is that semi-solid red stuff in the upper right corner? I thought blood was liquid, and I can't see where it was drawn in the first place.

Ah, it's fun to nitpick! Seriously, it ain't a bad cover, per se, but certainly misses some dramatic opportunity. I'd like to think of this one as Plan B and something fell through on the better version.

Best Marvel Cover: September

Last month, he got the worst, now he takes the best? What's going on here? In fairness, I was considering a few other covers as Besters this month-- most notably David Aja's consistently awesome Immortal Weapons/Iron Fist covers.

But this time, David Lafuente takes the Best for Runaways #14, on sale Sept. 23. What edged it out over the others in competition was an interesting design that features a neat little touch of the character interacting with the logo, which is also laid out in an appealing and playful design. The colors are great, and there's an intriguing balance to the elements/colors/weight. I have to admit, I want to read this comic, and you can't ask for a better cover than that. Although, I have to admit the fact that I am interested in the character in the first place helps a lot.

I will have to ding the cover on a bit too much overrendering with the light. The design and texture of the shape in the background is hampered, if not distorted, by it.  

Musings: Marvel's "Big" Mistake?

The Blob's new look as of DECIMATION: HOUSE OF M: THE DAY AFTER #1 (2006) by CHRIS CLAREMONT RANDY GREEN, & AARON LOPRESTI also available in trade paperback

It's been several years now since Marvel tried to "fix" the problem of having too many mutants running around the universe. Their solution was to have reality re-written so that mutants were rare, which forced dozens and dozens of mutant characters to be turned into non-characters so they could be forgotten about. Miraculously, none of the main X-Men were effected. (Whew! That was close. Boy, were *they* lucky!)

But many, many other characters were-- even those who featured quite prominently in the X-corner of the universe. None more tragic than the Blob. Sure, the fact that the Blob lost all his mutant powers of being fat, but kept all of his skin (in whatever way that is supposed to make sense) make for some pathos and tragic tear-jerking, but I'm more upset about the real tragedy-- Marvel has lost a great villain. The Blob is the kind of villain that Marvel really needs. The guy is pretty much an egotistical jerk, and that's really his whole motivation for being a bad guy. (Yeah, there's more to it than that, but that's a post for another time.)

But it's his powerset that makes him even more necessary. He's big, his monstrous without being an inhuman kind of monster, and it's completely visceral and visual. In other words, the Blob could talk big, walk big, and fight big. He's a serious threat but lends himself to physical comedy. He works well as part of a team-- again, because of the physical strength and prowess and also because of his attitude and the visual of having a Big Guy.

Personality, powerset, visual-- There's a reason that every animated incarnation of the X-Men includes a Blob.

With his current look, you still have the visual, I suppose. There's nothing physically imposing about it, but I guess it's got the creep factor. I'm sure you can do something with that, but until the Blob gets his powers back (if that's even possible), just watch. Sooner or later someone will create a similarly blobbish Big Guy for the X-Men to fight. The Blob is just That Necessary.

Musings: From Whence Comes a Villain's Story?

the cover of NEW AVENGERS #33 by LEINIL FRANCIS YU, also available in NEW AVENGERS VOL. 7: THE TRUST PREMIERE paperback

Here at the Flipside we focus on the villains. Most of the time, that means drawing a new costume for a villain or two, thinking up some interesting Super-Villain Team-Ups, categorizing villains by their arch-nemeses, and so on. The fun for me is that, when I get to do this, I get to consider the kinds of stories that would naturally come from any given villain. Which, actually, makes this website aptly named, as I think that process is actually a "flipped" way of thinking.

Let me explain.
I think most authors think about the what kinds of stories they want to tell about their HERO, and then find a villain to plug into them. So if I come at it from the villain's side first, the process is flipped the wrong-way around, right? Don't get me wrong, I like to think that we would come to the same conclusions-- the kinds of stories coming from the High Evolutionary are ones of, duh, evolution but also of the nature of man/inherent divinity. The kinds of stories coming from Thor are also about the nature of man/inherent divinity. So it's natural that the High Evolutionary ends up as a Thor villain. (Or he used to, anyway.)

A problem might occur, however, when an author thinks about the kinds of stories he wants to tell, but doesn't find a villain (or the 'right' villain) to plug into it. I mean, the story is about the *hero* after all, so the villain doesn't *really* matter, right? The villain could be interchangeable, or just be a placeholder for any generic kind of quote-unquote villainy that a hero must face. Maybe we can call it The Wrecking Crew Syndrome, as more often than not, the Wrecking Crew just stand in for a generic kind of brute villain rather than also being able to serve, let's say, as a thematic symbol of destruction/ construction or as a dramatic foil against the hero as one-who-preserves.

Think about the best Batman villains. Their longevity and popularity isn't just because of the plot they happen to be in at any given story; it's because their thematic gimmick helps fuel the stories at the same time. Two-Face highlights Batman's dual nature even as they fight atop the Second National Bank.

Think about it: isn't a hero memorable for the kinds of villain he faces? Name any resonant story, and chances are it was so pivotal precisely because the villains were so memorable. The Avengers' Mansion Siege, Gwen Stacy's death at the hands of the Green Goblin, Kraven's last hunt, Dr. Doom's Unthinkable attack on the Fantastic Four... Contrast this to the Hood filling up his gang with a grip of D-List names for no reason other than to have a grip of D-List names. OK, great. So he enlisted Dr. Demonicus... now what? 'Cause if you can't answer the "now what," does it really matter?

With DARK REIGN currently dominating Marvel's publishing line, there's a huge potential for the villains to "run" the stories like never before. In some cases, this works, as Osborn's issues of fatherhood take center stage of Spider-Man's "American Son." So maybe there are some steps in the right direction here. Don't give us disposable, interchangeable villains! I think the stories will resonate that much more strongly if every villain contributes, contrasts, highlights, or otherwise enhances the themes and issues in any given story.

What The--?! Marvel Cover: August

I'm always on the look out for covers that are funny, odd, or downright weird.  I'll be honest -- there didn't seem to be a lot of those this month. Not even on the Deadpool covers! (And no, the "meat suit" second printing doesn't count, since that was interior art from last month.) But this one did seem pretty odd: MARVEL ADVENTURES THE AVENGERS #39, cover by Casey Jones, on sale August 19.

"Odd" in the sense that I have to ask myself: what the heck is *really* going on here? Is it funny that Spider-Man is dressing up with elements from the other heroes' costumes? Really? But... it's just a mask, a shield and a cape. It would be much more funny if it was a Giant-Girl wig, a 'Tigra-skin' loincloth, and a feather boa to match Angel's wings. At least that would be ironic. But... just a mask, a shield and a cape? *Hhrm.*

And why are the other heroes there? Are their expressions bemused? Annoyed? Are they in on the "joke" or did they get played? If Spider-Man was alone on the cover with those different costume elements, there might be more of mystery, but having the others there just confuses the whole thing.

Bottom line, if every picture tells a story, the story this one tells is too unrecognizable, and the whole thing just ends up with a big "what the--?!"

Worst Marvel Cover: August

Like the Best award yesterday, there seems to be the same candidates up for nomination in the Worst category, too. But again, rather than pick on the same issues with the same artists, let's spread the 'love' (or rather, 'love-hate') around a bit. In this case:

ULTIMATE COMICS SPIDER-MAN #1, cover by David Lafuente Garcia, on sale August 12.

Let me just say that, on first glance, there's a lot to like on the cover. I like the more bulbous/cartoony style for comic book art, and there are some nice touches on the main figures. For example, I like Spidey's left hand as he tosses the webbing away. That's done really well.

But if there's anything that will make a Worst cover stand out, it's a travesty of anatomy, and our 'winner' has it in spades. The Spidey figure isn't the worst offender-- but that head is just a bit too round. There's a clash between going for cartoony-realistic and cartoony-stylized reality, and the head seems disconnected to the body. The right leg, too, seems just folded over rather than adhereing to the demands of actual flesh-and-bone. For Spider-Woman, one leg seems longer than the other, and that's not because of foreshortening. Look at her hands, are they supposed to be pulling on the same string? And it's a personal choice but I'd have not put in a little highlight on her crotch. Her head/hair seems too flat on the right side, and it completely flattens what would otherwise be a nicely rounded figure. And Shadowcat's right arm is either way too long or it's disconnected, flying behind her.

But all that's pretty nitpicky, isn't it? The real trouble is in the faces of the "real" people like Aunt May and MJ and others. The eyes are set too far in and too far apart, making all figures seem disfigured and more or less the same. May's got something weird going on with her folded arms, and Iceman's shoulders seem oddly connected, like they aren't rounded enough or they're set too far into his body. 

You could chalk it all up to the artist's individual style, but there's too much discrepency between, as I said, cartoony-realistic and cartoony-stylized. If it is a style, it's an artist who seem trying to break or push a style and not being totally comfortable in it. The coloring doesn't help too much, with the colorist adding depth which only highlights how un-depthful the artist was drawing (or worse, how un-depthful the faces seem when compared to how round the bodies/figures are.)

Certainly, it could have been WORSE, and if this is truly the worse Marvel's got to offer this month, it's a pretty good month, overall. 

Next up, the WHAT THE--?! award!