If Sex and the City had been about superheroes, it would have looked like Ultra: Seven Days.
I like Johnathon Luna's art syle. I liked the fake magazine covers for each chapter and I liked the detail that went into some of the panals (the article about Pearl's one night stand is visible in the panel that she first reads it. It's easier to read in the full spread, but possible to read in the panel).
I liked Joshua Luna's writing style. He was able to write strong women characters without having them be bitches if he didn't want them to be. I liked that there were people in the world that were heroes because it was the right thing to do. I can see them being celebrities and I can see them having to belong to some kind of organisation but it was a pleasant change after reading Watchmen.
Some of it is horribly cliched, but that's almost to be expected in a superhero book that's mocking the heroes. Having to have thier plot happen in seven days ultimately turned into something of a handicap. I felt they could have used a few more chapters to really polish the story. I'm giving it a 3.
Sunday, April 5, 2009
Witchblade Takeru Manga
A girl and a sword and a demon. Witchblade Takeru sounds like something I'd enjoy so my husband recommended that I read it. It wasn't bad.
The art by Kazasa Sumita really was stunning (if a little over-eroticised but that just might be a difference in culture) and the story was OK. I thought that Kobayashi needed more time to tell it though.
Some of the events seemed to be squashed into place. If a chapter ended with a cliffhanging revelation (which they often did) it was resolved quickly and usually by explaining that the character had either been lied to of they'd heard it wrong. Some of the characters didn't make sense: the librarian, Takeru's friend and the president especially. The relationship between Kou and Takeru was more more interesting and I felt that he could have dealt with that more before jumping into demon killing action. Just as we got to know the characters the whole thing was over. I was a little disappointed.
I'll give this one a 3. OK, but not great.
The art by Kazasa Sumita really was stunning (if a little over-eroticised but that just might be a difference in culture) and the story was OK. I thought that Kobayashi needed more time to tell it though.
Some of the events seemed to be squashed into place. If a chapter ended with a cliffhanging revelation (which they often did) it was resolved quickly and usually by explaining that the character had either been lied to of they'd heard it wrong. Some of the characters didn't make sense: the librarian, Takeru's friend and the president especially. The relationship between Kou and Takeru was more more interesting and I felt that he could have dealt with that more before jumping into demon killing action. Just as we got to know the characters the whole thing was over. I was a little disappointed.
I'll give this one a 3. OK, but not great.
Friday, March 20, 2009
The Rage: Forsaken Player's Guide
I loved Werewolf the Apocalypse when White Wolf decided to change the World of Darkness and reboot things I hesitated. I still have trouble wrapping my mind around what's expected of characters as Forsaken rather than Garou but reading The Rage, I finally stopped trying to fit Forsaken into what I knew about the Apocalypse but actually read them as Forsaken.
The book is divided into three sections, Tribes, Rules and Setting. The setting was interesting, not sure if it's something I'd incorporate into a game but maybe taking portions of the ideas presented to add colour to NPCs would be fun. The rules sections suffers the problems of all attempts to add merits, flaws and gifts to the main rules. Some of them are too powerful and some try to take the place of something that already works. New Gifts I tend to just toss and new merits and flaws often need pretty good reasoning from my players to make their way into the campaign. The first section was the most useful.
The tribal section did a really good job of not only expanding the information on the tribes but of also filling out the roles of werewolves within the tribes. I could come up with ideas for every tribe and auspice available in the game. Before I was having trouble coming up with one character idea as none of the tribes were very appealing to me. If I were starting a new campaign I'd have my players read this section to just help them come up with ideas.
Unfortunately this book didn't answer some basic questions I had about the world. How does a werewolf choose a tribe? Are the tribes represented fairly equally in any given area? Do the tribes come together for grand conferences when a new werewolf is newly changed. Is a werewolf a Ghost Wolf automatically for a time before choosing a tribe or is there a "grace period" while he or she is initiated into the culture?
The book gave me better ideas on how the world worked, but it didn't give me quite what I expected so I'll give it a 3.
The book is divided into three sections, Tribes, Rules and Setting. The setting was interesting, not sure if it's something I'd incorporate into a game but maybe taking portions of the ideas presented to add colour to NPCs would be fun. The rules sections suffers the problems of all attempts to add merits, flaws and gifts to the main rules. Some of them are too powerful and some try to take the place of something that already works. New Gifts I tend to just toss and new merits and flaws often need pretty good reasoning from my players to make their way into the campaign. The first section was the most useful.
The tribal section did a really good job of not only expanding the information on the tribes but of also filling out the roles of werewolves within the tribes. I could come up with ideas for every tribe and auspice available in the game. Before I was having trouble coming up with one character idea as none of the tribes were very appealing to me. If I were starting a new campaign I'd have my players read this section to just help them come up with ideas.
Unfortunately this book didn't answer some basic questions I had about the world. How does a werewolf choose a tribe? Are the tribes represented fairly equally in any given area? Do the tribes come together for grand conferences when a new werewolf is newly changed. Is a werewolf a Ghost Wolf automatically for a time before choosing a tribe or is there a "grace period" while he or she is initiated into the culture?
The book gave me better ideas on how the world worked, but it didn't give me quite what I expected so I'll give it a 3.
Sunday, February 1, 2009
The Dark Knight Returns
When I read Watchmen I said there were certain graphic novels that really changed the way the comics industry looked at itself. Watchmen was one Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns is the other. This looks at some of the themes that Moore played with in Watchmen, like what if the world no longer needed superheroes and what would these superheroes do if they weren't needed but does it much better than Moore did. I didn't like Watchmen because I didn't like the heroes. Miller does a much better job of reminding his readers that we do like Batman, and even Commissioner Gordon whose story sort of parallels that of the superhero.
I had a couple of problems: Batman quitting and Robin.
I just can't imagine Batman quitting if he felt his city still needed him. If there was a government mandate, he'd ignore it. I didn't get the impression that he'd been forced into retirement, but that the other heroes had convinced him to retire after political events. His retirement only serves to make his return more memorable. When his city needs him he's there; older, slower and a little on the worse for wear side but he's there and he's still the best they've got.
Batman without Robin is always a little bit off for me. I really think he needs the sidekick to keep him human and to keep him from spiraling into obsession, however, I don't think Robin served in this story. I would have preferred maybe a return of the original over the creation of a new. The problem is with the creation. Dick had a great beginning. He had the whole parents killed connection with Bruce and he had the skills because he was a circus acrobat. When he left and they gave us the Jason Robin it was a disappointment. In the original origin he was a copy of Dick. That doesn't work. Then he was a street kid who tried to steel the Batmobile's wheels. Batman admired his moxy, pitied his circumstances and made him Robin. Remember how that turned out? Finally, there's the Tim Robin. He's original. He's more of a detective; tracking down Batman by figuring out that Nightwing was Robin and was Dick Grayson. He got that Batman needed a Robin to keep him level. That brings me to the new Robin. Carrie is more of a Jason Robin. She thinks it's cool that Batman has returned and gets a Robin costume on a whim. She reminds me of a Jason Robin. It just didn't work for me.
I did like how Miller introduced Superman. First with the American flag resolving into the Superman symbol on his chest and then from his POV from on high. The relationship between him and Batman was great. They've been friends for a long time, but their ideals do not mesh. A showdown between the two of them was inevitable.
Relationships actually play into The Dark Knight Returns more than I thought they would. The Bruce/Gordon relationship, where it's obvious that Bruce revealed himself as Batman somewhere in their history together. And Alfred. Alfred had some great moments in this book. They revolved around his relationship with Bruce, Batman and even the whole Wayne family. I thought he was written really well.
This one gets a 5 from me.
I had a couple of problems: Batman quitting and Robin.
I just can't imagine Batman quitting if he felt his city still needed him. If there was a government mandate, he'd ignore it. I didn't get the impression that he'd been forced into retirement, but that the other heroes had convinced him to retire after political events. His retirement only serves to make his return more memorable. When his city needs him he's there; older, slower and a little on the worse for wear side but he's there and he's still the best they've got.
Batman without Robin is always a little bit off for me. I really think he needs the sidekick to keep him human and to keep him from spiraling into obsession, however, I don't think Robin served in this story. I would have preferred maybe a return of the original over the creation of a new. The problem is with the creation. Dick had a great beginning. He had the whole parents killed connection with Bruce and he had the skills because he was a circus acrobat. When he left and they gave us the Jason Robin it was a disappointment. In the original origin he was a copy of Dick. That doesn't work. Then he was a street kid who tried to steel the Batmobile's wheels. Batman admired his moxy, pitied his circumstances and made him Robin. Remember how that turned out? Finally, there's the Tim Robin. He's original. He's more of a detective; tracking down Batman by figuring out that Nightwing was Robin and was Dick Grayson. He got that Batman needed a Robin to keep him level. That brings me to the new Robin. Carrie is more of a Jason Robin. She thinks it's cool that Batman has returned and gets a Robin costume on a whim. She reminds me of a Jason Robin. It just didn't work for me.
I did like how Miller introduced Superman. First with the American flag resolving into the Superman symbol on his chest and then from his POV from on high. The relationship between him and Batman was great. They've been friends for a long time, but their ideals do not mesh. A showdown between the two of them was inevitable.
Relationships actually play into The Dark Knight Returns more than I thought they would. The Bruce/Gordon relationship, where it's obvious that Bruce revealed himself as Batman somewhere in their history together. And Alfred. Alfred had some great moments in this book. They revolved around his relationship with Bruce, Batman and even the whole Wayne family. I thought he was written really well.
This one gets a 5 from me.
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Chibi Vampire Volume 12
Wow! Stuff happens again. I have to admit I assumed Chibi Vampire was like Ranma where things are the way they are "just because" and they were unlikely to change. Instead, Kagesaki is hinting that there's something special about Karin's condition.
This one's getting a 4.
This one's getting a 4.
Friday, January 9, 2009
Watchmen
There are some comics that come along and challenge the genre. They make the jump from simple entertainment and become literature. Watchmen by Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons is one of those comics. In fact, it's probably one of two that really made people believe that comics could be more than simple entertainment.
Watchmen takes place in a world where superheroes are reality. Not like the DC universe or the Marvel universe but like if I opened the paper this morning and was unsurprised to find that a masked vigilante had stopped a bank robbery yesterday. It's an interesting idea, it certainly is played out often enough, but it's not one that I like. Maybe I'm just naive but I like stories where people put on the costumes because it's the "right thing to do". I like when they're treated like heroes, not bought or sponsored or compared to deviants. It's part of the reason I like DC better than Marvel.
It took me a while to actually sit down and write something out for Watchmen. I sort of feel like it deserves a much better review than I want to give it. I liked the articles between chapters, I felt it added a lot to the world that Moore was trying to create. I liked the subplot pirate story that Moore included. It not only showed what people were reading for fun in a world that had superheroes, it was also a companion tale to the story. The two were exploring the same themes but in different genres. Although, I wanted a different artist for the pirate comic, or different colouring, to really set it apart from the main story.
As for the story itself, I almost hate to say it this way, but I think it made more of an impact in 1985 than it would in 2009. The "post 9/11" world isn't as focused on nuclear annihilation as we were back in the 80s and I can't see the world reacting to the disaster as Moore writes it. It just seemed to lack something.
So, here's my problem, I kind of just felt that it was OK. I'd like to give it a 3, but I also recognise that it really changed a lot of things about comics, who read them and why, and allowed for greater creativity in what a lot of people think of as a pretty narrow genre. So, for the strength of literature I'll give it a 4.
Watchmen takes place in a world where superheroes are reality. Not like the DC universe or the Marvel universe but like if I opened the paper this morning and was unsurprised to find that a masked vigilante had stopped a bank robbery yesterday. It's an interesting idea, it certainly is played out often enough, but it's not one that I like. Maybe I'm just naive but I like stories where people put on the costumes because it's the "right thing to do". I like when they're treated like heroes, not bought or sponsored or compared to deviants. It's part of the reason I like DC better than Marvel.
It took me a while to actually sit down and write something out for Watchmen. I sort of feel like it deserves a much better review than I want to give it. I liked the articles between chapters, I felt it added a lot to the world that Moore was trying to create. I liked the subplot pirate story that Moore included. It not only showed what people were reading for fun in a world that had superheroes, it was also a companion tale to the story. The two were exploring the same themes but in different genres. Although, I wanted a different artist for the pirate comic, or different colouring, to really set it apart from the main story.
As for the story itself, I almost hate to say it this way, but I think it made more of an impact in 1985 than it would in 2009. The "post 9/11" world isn't as focused on nuclear annihilation as we were back in the 80s and I can't see the world reacting to the disaster as Moore writes it. It just seemed to lack something.
So, here's my problem, I kind of just felt that it was OK. I'd like to give it a 3, but I also recognise that it really changed a lot of things about comics, who read them and why, and allowed for greater creativity in what a lot of people think of as a pretty narrow genre. So, for the strength of literature I'll give it a 4.
Sunday, December 28, 2008
The Vegetable Garderner's Bible
So I have a backyard that's too small to play in but too big to lay vacant. With the prices of everything going up, combined with fond memories of my grandmother, I thought I might start a vegetable garden. After reading Edward Smith's The Vegetable Gardener's Bible I decided that I maybe don't have the best spot after all. I'll certainly check it out in the spring but if I decide to plant anything this year it'll probably just be a few berry bushes in the front garden.
That was the great thing about this book though. It laid out everything you need to know to start a garden from scratch, an extensive index of vegetables and what you need to do to be successful with them and a writing style that makes you believe that you can do it. Even when you live in a northern climate with a shortened growing season. I'll give this one a 4, even if I won't have a garden this Spring.
That was the great thing about this book though. It laid out everything you need to know to start a garden from scratch, an extensive index of vegetables and what you need to do to be successful with them and a writing style that makes you believe that you can do it. Even when you live in a northern climate with a shortened growing season. I'll give this one a 4, even if I won't have a garden this Spring.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)