50-Word (Comic) Review- Red Thorn #1- If Kurt Cobain were alive today he would be 48-years-old

Writer: David Baillie
Artist: Meghan Hetrick
Publisher: Vertigo (DC)
Released: 18th November 2015 (not 1994)



Halfway through and it’s annoying the heck out of me. The characters are douchebags, nothing is believable, and the references are early 1990’s bands. Yuck, I don’t want to read about unbelievable, unlikeable asses. Why are comic book writers still stuck in 1993? Will I read the entire issue? No.



Rating: 2/10

I was a huge fan of Nirvana, and when Kurt died in 1994 I found it sad, but predictable. His songs were about a miserable, nothing happening adolescence, and as he got famous they morphed into songs about hating fame, and wanting to go back to the life that he hated anyway. Heroin addiction and death were inevitable for a man who refused to look on the bright side. He left some great, angry, pounding music behind him, but his refusal to embrace the possibility of future happiness killed him. I got over Nirvana a long time ago, but that’s doesn’t appear to be the case for a lot of people. I was in the supermarket today, and Kurt’s face was on the front of a top-selling (meaning it sells about ten issues) music magazine, and now I’ve just read a ‘new’ comic book from Vertigo, and Kurt is all over that as well. What the hell happened? When did our culture grind to a halt? When did looking back, relying on nostalgia, become the norm? Kurt died 21 FN YEARS AGO!!! It’s time to move on, and do something genuinely new, so when I read a comic book with (yet another) young female protagonist, and she’s all about Nirvana, it’s an immediate turn-off. A big flashing neon sign clobbers me over the head and tells me that this writer has nothing to say about now, so is going back to the past in an attempt to pump some meaning into his already moribund creation. Goddamn it man. Another FN comic with Nirvana references. I can’t believe it. Well, I can, and that’s why it’s so bloody depressing. Agggghhh, enough words, sod this comic book, over.

50-Word (comic) Review: Art Ops #1- Dead art illustrates book where art comes alive

Writer: Shaun Simon
Artist: Mike Allred
Publisher: Vertigo/DC
Released: 28th October 2015



Art portraits are real, the subject lives within the frame, can be stolen, protected by ‘Art-Ops.’ The Mona Lisa is a physical lady, not oil on canvas. Creative idea from Shaun Simon, but I dislike the art. Comic book about art being alive has unimpressive art, ends up defeating itself?


Rating: 5/10

I really enjoyed ‘Neverboy’ from Shaun Simon. It had a great central idea, and the art (By Tyler Jenkins) was perfect for what the book was trying to convey. It was a book about creativity, and the art was very creative, so it was the perfect marriage between narrative and art. ‘Art-Ops’ features another creative concept from writer Shaun Simon, with the idea being that art is alive within the frame, and that what is drawn can come out of the frame and interact with the physical world. The ‘Art-Ops’ (who they work for, or how they are funded, is not specified) work to protect the people living in the portraits (how does it work with things like mountains and landscape portraits?) from art thieves. Are the art thieves purely interested in money, or is something more interesting going on? I’m not sure, but I’m sure we’ll find out later as I am unsure about any of the motivations here. The main protagonists are a punk haired boy (makes a change from a punk haired girl I guess, but what is it with the punk haircuts in comic books?) and his Mum. His Mum worked for the art-ops, but goes missing, and it’s up to him to take her place, but he’s reluctant, as is to be expected. He has no Dad by the way, which is a theme that I’m really starting to notice now in all forms of mainstream cultural programming. If you’ve read anything on my blog you’ll know what I think about that, and how the state wants fathers out of the lives of children, leaving children easy pray for the father substitute that is the state. I hope that the father turns up in this book, and I hope that he’s a good guy, as that will make a nice change from the norm and will be sending out a strong message about the importance of fathers, but we’ll see. The main problem I had with this book however was that I disliked Mike Allred’s art. I found it to be borderline bad, lacking in detail, lacking in intensity, lacking in emotion, blocky, static, amateurish, basic, and just not very good at all. What more can I say? I didn't like it, at all. That’s a huge disappointment to me because I really enjoyed the art in Neverboy, and the art here (for me) is nowhere near as good. I wanted to be impressed by this book, but the art just isn’t doing it for me, and I don’t know if there’s enough here plot/character/idea wise for me to hang around for too long. Because of the good-will I still retain from my enjoyment of Neverboy I’ll give it one more issue before making up my mind about it, but sad as it is for me to type out these words, I’m feeling very much underwhelmed by this book at the moment.

Comic review: Survivor’s Club #1- The new new is the old new

Writer: Lauren Beukes & Dale Halvorsen
Artist: Ryan Kelly
Publisher: Vertigo/DC
Released: 7th October 2015



The blurb on the front cover of this book (from Joe Hill, son of Stephen King) describes the book as, ‘a throwback to books like THE SANDMAN and HELLBLAZER.’

With that blurb you have a declaration of intent. The producers of the book are telling you that they intend to go back to the past, and use nostalgia to create the new ‘new.’ I wrote about that yesterday when I compared contemporary comic book writers to Jeremy Corbyn and the ‘new’ ‘new’ Labour party, which is actually the old Labour party from the 70’s/80’s.

What is it with writers working for mainstream entertainment corporations that stops them from getting with the NOW and doing something genuinely NEW rather than relying on dusty old ideas and ideologies of the past?

I’ll answer that question in a sentence:

Neoliberal consensus, collectivist, authoritarian political correctness, pushed by your local (state funded) university in gender studies/Marxism classes.

It’s everywhere now, you can’t escape it, and this new/new/old comic book is all on board and willing to do its bit for the progressive collectivist cause.

The narrative of Survivor’s Club #1 is focused on the ubiquitous champion of progressive ideology, the young, sexually appealing (but not overly sexualised) woman of colour. She is a leader, an engineer, a computer gamer (expert level, obviously ), and a survivor of the evil white racist regime that was apartheid South Africa.

Do you have your PC tick box ready? Here we go, tick off those politically correct brownie points.

- Young female.
- Not white.
- Victim of white racism.
- Engineer.
- Leader.
- Computer game player, and an expert one at that.

I want to make this very clear. I’m not complaining about any of this. All I am doing is pointing out the neoliberal corporate consensus agenda, an agenda that is being pushed right now in comic books.

There is a severe lack of diversity happening right now in the comic book genre. It’s dominated by progressivism, feminism and Marxist identity politics. That’s not my opinion, it’s just the way that it is. Pick up any contemporary comic book, have a look, and tell me that it’s not the case.

The new heroes (young females) are starting to look very similar, and the new villains (racist, right wing white males) are just as similar as well. If I didn’t know any better I’d suspect that there’s some sort of ideological consensus in contemporary comic books that people should be talking about, but perhaps I’m just another evil white man and I don’t know what I’m talking about?

I can feel the anger building up now. Am I really complaining that young women of colour are being portrayed as heroic protagonists in comic books? No, I'm not. What I'm complaining about is a lack of diversity. There are too many strong independent young women in comic books now. Book after book and the heroines all look and act the same. That's boring, really, really boring, and I'm starting to get really fed up with this lazy, self-congratulatory progressive/feminist agenda being shoved down my throat in all of my comic books.

I began this ‘review’ with a quote that described this book as a ‘throwback.’ Sorry, but that’s not true. This comic book might have a narrative based on 1980’s computer games, but it’s a book very much set in the identity politics obsessed mainstream comic book world of today. I read this book and it doesn’t remind me of Sandman or Hellblazer, it reminds me of just about every other comic book that I’m reading at the moment.

So what is it about? Did I mention that yet? Probably not, okay then, here we go. It’s about a computer game turning people into violent murderers, or something. Is that new? Does that sound ‘new’ to you? Do we really need to look at the link between computer games and violence again? Didn’t that debate end many, many, many years ago, and with the conclusion that no, computer games don’t make you violent?

The only difference in the debate about computer game violence in 2015 as compared to 1986 is that today it’s been taken up by the social justice warriors, whilst before it was pushed by right wing evangelical Christian types.

There’s nothing new here. Computer games are sexist, racist and violent, and they warp the minds of the young, blah, blah, blah. Do we really need a comic book to be talking about this tired old nonsense again?

I don’t care if this story is coming out on the side of computer games, and gamers, it doesn’t matter. The debate is old, irrelevant, and I don’t want to read about it. I have no interest in ‘Gamer-Gate’ because it’s bull****. The whole thing is bull****. The social identities of the authoritarian nut-cases might have changed, but the bull**** remains the same, and I don’t want to rehash old controversies that have been debunked decades ago and are not even worth wasting any time on in 2015.

‘Survivor’s Club #1’ is nothing. It’s just another new/new/old comic book that is pushing the same old agenda as all of the other new/new/old comic books that make up the US comic book industry in 2015. It’s not saying anything new, it’s not connecting with any cutting edge issues of today, and as a forty something year old guy who is getting increasingly fed up with young girl protagonists and white male guilt identity politics bull**** it has absolutely nothing to offer for me. I had high hopes for this one. I should have known better, what a fool I am.



Rating: 3/10 (Yet another in a long line of stuck in the past, yet obsessing over PC identity politics comic books from the progressive mind of the mainstream comic book collective)

Comic Review: Sandman Overture #5- “Hey Barry, get out of your bedroom, it’s lovely outside.”

Writer: Neil Gaiman
Artist: J.H. Williams III
Colours: Dave Stewart
Publisher: Vertigo (DC)
Released: 27th May 2015


Sandman has returned, belatedly, and I enjoyed wallowing in the slow, bedroom depressed, self questioning, unsure about activity or inactivity world of 90’s gloom once again.

The art works perfectly with the mindset on display within the book. There’s a cat, the Goth King (Dream) mopes, he’s unsure about everything, a war is going on, a battle against the blackness of staying in his bedroom, and the difficult world outside, where everything is being destroyed anyway.

Why not settle down with a nice woman, asks his Mum? Goth bloke mopes, back to his bedroom again. Who is to save him? A text message, destiny forces him out, and his cat has a nice surprise for him in the kitty litter.

The delay on this title has been so long, but it works, because when the book finally does turn up, the narrative itself is all about themes of delay, being static, thinking about destiny, and time, and dreams.

‘I did not need rescuing. I was doing perfectly well on my own.’

Of course, he wasn’t, and as he falls reluctantly back into reality would it be so hard for him to mumble a small word of thanks?

Kids, 90’s Goth kids at that, what are you going to do? They just need a bit of sunlight, to go to the park with their younger siblings, to play on the swings and have a laugh, swings always cheer them up.

Yeah, I enjoyed Sandman Overture #5. The art is beautiful, the story is as Goth as Goth gets, and although Dream doesn’t smile, there’s hope in the litter tray, sunshine on the swings, and it’s nice to see him getting out of his 90’s bedroom, at least for a short time.



Rating: 9/10 (Enjoyable 90’s Gothness)

Review: The Sandman Overture #4- Nothing is happening here

Writer: Neil Gaiman
Artist: J.H. Williams III
Publisher: Vertigo (DC)
Released: 17th December 2014


I could never completely lose myself in this new version of the Sandman, mainly because the allegorical/metaphorical wall being created by writer Neil Gaiman is a little too thin, too flimsy, too see-through to allow any real emotional engagement or exploration of deeper spiritual/moral truths.

The problem here is that writer Neil Gaiman’s meaning is all too clear, and it’s not very interesting at all. In ‘The Sandman Overture #4 the writer looks at what he has created, at the doors it has opened for him, talks about access to ‘stars’ and decides that his creation will not be killed off, rather he will put it into permanent stasis.

This means that Neil Gaiman is going to write other stuff, and leave his Sandman book in the past, where it probably, and most certainly safely, belongs. There is no deeper meaning here. There are no deeper spiritual or moral truths being explored. This is a book about a writing career. It really is as self-indulgent as that.

Issue #4 of this six issue series feels like the end. It’s strange, because there’s two issues left. If Neil Gaiman is trying to make his readers lose interest in the Sandman character and the universe he inhabits then he’s doing a great job here.

Perhaps that’s the entire point? Perhaps he’s just fed up of it, and this book is a final squeeze of the lemon before a final discard?

It hasn’t been as bad as those instantly forgettable Watchmen prequels of 2012, but after reading this particular issue I got pretty much the same feeling. It’s a book that’s tapping into old memories, but not creating new ones of it’s own.

Give it a few years and Sandman Overture will be regarded as a needless full stop to something that had already ended. It's not bad, but it’s not particularly good either. It’s that awful middle, the lukewarm curse of the world called indifference. If you are new to the Sandman universe then don’t start here. Read and enjoy the old books. Nothing is happening here.

Rating: 4/10

Comic book review: The Names #1- I dedicate this review to the fanboys out there

Writer: Peter Milligan
Artist; Leandro Fernandez
Publisher: Vertigo (DC)
Released: 3rd September 2014



It will be interesting to see how well this comic fares, as it’s dealing with something that a lot of the 1990’s obsessed fanboys fear more than anything else. Yes, I’m talking about the dreaded R word……

REALITY.

Yeah, I know that was a bit harsh, but it’s true on a lot of levels as well. This book is dealing with something that has hit the news recently, something that looks like a series of coincidences, but to those of a more conspiratorial mind-set looks like forming an ominous pattern, being indicative of something sinister going on, and something catastrophic that is yet to come.

That ‘something’ is the recent spate of bank assholes that have committed ‘suicide.’ Or did they really commit suicide at all? That’s where ‘The Names’ begins, with a bank tosser being forced to write a suicide note before taking a swan dive out of his office window.

There’s a great villain introduced early on in the book, and the heroine is a super hot, punch you in the face feminist. You know the kind of woman that Quentin Tarrantino creams himself over, the middle class wet blanket that he is. There’s a reason that comic book fans love Quentin and his 1970’s homage movies. The reason is that they feature strong, independent, sexy women. These sexy/manly women are substitutes for a lack of masculinity in the lives of the pathetic, suburb dwelling dweebs who adore Quentin and his N word movies. Watching his movies helps them briefly escape their emasculated realities where political correctness has bathed them in a mind bath of male guilt bullshit. They want to be men, but they feel so very bad about it, so end up being fanboys instead, with an empathise on ‘boys.’ Lacking any manhood in themselves they look to strong, fictional females to surreptitiously inject some testosterone into their veins. They cheer for the feisty, independent kick-ass women not because they want to sleep with them. No, they wouldn’t do that, because that would mean they are ‘objectifying’ them and that wouldn’t be politically correct, would it? No, they love to watch movies and read comics about these women because they want to be them.

That’s not to say I have problems with her inevitable appearance in this mainstream comic book. I understand why she’s there. She’s bait for the feminist liberal dweebs, and as this comic book business is about getting them to read your stuff I cannot criticise the decision to have her as the main protagonist. People such as myself would prefer a strong independent male protagonist, but I accept that they are rare these days outside of a Conan book, so it is what it is.

The art by the way is great. The cover-art kind of sucks, but the interior art is all dark shadows, atmosphere, angles and creativity. It’s early days, but so far I like it a lot.

If you take a chance on ‘The Names’ you are going to get a book with nice art, a contemporary plot theme, a strong independent woman protagonist and some creepy villains. It’s a good start, the script is engaging with a ‘too cool for school’ dialogue and it’s nice to see a comic book about bank bastards for a change. Oh, and as for my little mid-review rant about feminist liberal comic book fan dweebs, I just put that in there to light a fire underneath some flabby asses. If it sounds like I was talking about you in this review then take it as a big flashing neon sign above your head that says- TIME TO MAN UP, SON. Put the political correctness in the bin and start being a man, not a fanboy waiting in-line at a convention as horrified writers and artists count down the seconds before they can get the hell away from you.

Rating: 8/10

Comic book review: Sandman Overture #3: Reader meet author

Writer: Neil Gaiman
Artist: J.H. Williams III
Publisher: Vertigo (DC)
Released: 30th July 2014

Morrissey knows- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCR8T5YFHg4

It’s been a long wait, but we expected that, and now after reading the third instalment of The Sandman Overture I’m more certain than ever that what Neil Gaiman is doing here is working through his career as a writer, and the success that his most famous creation has given to him. 

I don’t know anything about Neil Gaiman’s life story, and I’ve only attempted to read one of his novels (it was boring and I stopped reading one third of the way through), so I’m not a fanboy. I enjoyed reading his Sandman comic books in the 1990’s, and I left it there, in the past. 

This new Sandman book has a nostalgic quality, and that’s why I’m reading it. It reminds me of some horrible times in my own life when I didn’t have much to look forward to apart from a good book.

Sandman was a good book, it opened a door to something better, something more interesting than my own lead weight life of predictable reality, routine and sleepwalking through crowds of horrifyingly indifferent people. 

I welcome its return, but everything has changed. Not just in my own life of course, but in the wider world as well. Read my other reviews, as that’s where I’ll detail the changes, this review is going to be simple, precise and short.

Sandman Overture #2 is heavy in text, and some of the background art looks wonderful. It has that mythical, mystical, intergalactic, otherworldly, spaced out quality that makes you think of larger, weightier concepts than everyday concerns on planet Earth. You can get lost in this world, and that’s exactly what the Sandman books used to do so very well when they were new, different and special.

The fanboys will appreciate that. They can pretend it’s still 1996. They do love to do that. I however read nothing in this script other than a writer talking about being a celebrity (a ‘star’) and how to deal with killing off the character that made him a star in the first place. Is it a subconscious thing? I think so. Gaiman is sitting down and writing his reality into the world of the Sandman. 

It’s not a bad book. It’s a book with a famous author revisiting the character that has allowed him to live a life as a celebrity writer. If you want to know how Neil Gaiman really feels about the character that made his name, then buy this book.  I can’t get anything else out of it.

I’m 100% positive that I would have loved this book if I read it back in 1996 as a bored and alienated young man. However, in 2014, and as the man that I am today, I read it, put it aside and think, man, life has really changed me. That’s all. 

Rating: 7/10