E-MAIL RYALL | E-MAIL TIPTON | ARCHIVES
MAIL SHOOT
January 30, 2006
Lewis L. writes: Alrighty, here are some things that I’d love for you to get into for future Comics 101 sessions:
1. In the last Supergirl column, you said that it was very likely that Linda Danvers very likely went into Peter David’s next series Fallen Angel. What was Fallen Angel?
2. With the imminent canceling of the current JLA run with the OYL stuff, how about finishing up the JLA column finally? It’s a longer series, I admit, but there were some nifty storylines along the way.
3. How about a take on some Elseworlds tales like Kingdom Come or the Nail?
Tipton: FALLEN ANGEL was a great, moody, noirish dark fantasy series Peter David did for a while at DC, which is now being published at IDW. You should go check it out, I highly recommend it.
Hopefully you’ve been reading in recent weeks for our return to JLA.
KINGDOM COME, definitely. THE NAIL sounds like a good idea, too.
###
Mark L. writes: I've been reading your column every week for a while now--fantastic stuff, even if it's about characters I don't care about (I don't give a rat's ass about Green Arrow, for instance, but the columns were still interesting as hell).
Anyway, thanks for spotlighting the DeMatteis/Buscema run last week. One of the greatest creative teams to ever work on Spider-Man, hands down. I usually despise Spider-books with dark themes, but they consistently pulled it off. As for Sal Buscema, I completely agree--one of the overlooked greats. "The Child Within" books were among the first comics I ever read, and it's great to see them get the spotlight they deserve.
If I might, here's a few runs I'd like to see covered:
-Untold Tales of Spider-Man (my favorite comic of all time, but I think I'm the only one who ever remembers it)
-Morrison's New X-Men (I quit reading comics for a few years, and came back to find Beast looking like the dog-faced boy and Cyclops banging the White Queen. It doesn't follow.)
-the latest Thor series (I mean Dan Jurgens' run)
Tipton: All three good topics for future columns. I loved the Jurgens Thor run.
###
Steven D. writes: I'm sure you've seen/read about Spider-Man's new suit design at Marvel.com, and i also know you've expressed atleast a passive disguist w/ most things Marvel nowadays, but I was wondering if you'd share your thoughts on this.
Me, personally, I don't really care. The way I see it, by the time Spider-Man 3 comes out, Marvel's going to want the guy on their book covers to look like the guy in the movie, so I don't think it'll last long.
I know a lot of people may disagree, but I don't even find it that horrible of a costume. I've always like the idea of a larger, sharper looking spider, but I'm not all up for the colors and I think the tech stuff is just kinda weird.
After that whole Green Goblin/Gwen Stacy twins scenario, I've kinda become numb to whatever they do to Spider-Man. They retcon everything else, are they working on getting rid of that? That'd be nice...if it's all a prank played by...I don't care. Tombstone. Whynot? Oh well...you've gone over all that...
In short: What're your thoughts on Spider-Man's new costume? Love your articles and thanks for your time.
Tipton: Well, it's hard to get too worked up about a costume change. It always changes back. It actually isn't a bad design as much as a bad color scheme, but I'm sure that plays into the whole Iron Man storyline. I'm cool either way, especially since I'm not really reading the books any more.
###
Vicente P. writes: Hello, first things first, I've been reading your column for the past
couple of days, and I've been enjoying it, and at the same time,
wondering where could I get some of the comics you descrive, because,
Im from Chile in south america, sohere the comics are obviously
translated into spanish and we get them with a lot of delay (just
today I first saw Superman BirthRight in the stands) and If I go to
the comic shops, where I can get them with not too much delay, but the
price is too damm expensive for a 18 year old like me.
Now, here the thing, Ive been reading memories since I have memories,
maybe because my uncle used to tell me stories about Captain Marvel,
from where he read them on oldcomics.
(hmm, curious, soon the comics may replace, or take apart with, folk
tales and children stories such as Red Riding Hood....makes you think
huh?)
Anyway, I wanted to talk to you about a lot of topics, the first being
that since I dont have much acces to comics (and to be honest, I cant
blame it entirely to distribution, cause some editions are damm good,
like the Crisis on infinte earth re edition by VID (a mexican
translator editorial, wich I think is now gone...sad.) but maybe to
the over price of some comics, here the entire HUSH mini series cost a
lot of money, like 2 times the original price, and no, we dont get any
of thos "1 dollar! comics.
Well, to get back, since I've been away from comics for a while, I
missed a lot of stuf, like identity crisis and the golden age thing,
but recently, some friends showed me Hush and Long Halloween, so I
began to get into the comic world once again, and in search for info,
I stumbled across your classes, good doctor, but didnt see much about
some part that I missed, like hush, Long Halloween, Identity Crisis,
and such...but what most caught my eye, was the lack ofa Sandman
Column. You covered Sin City, awesome, JLA. great, XMEN,yay, batman,
HELL YEAH, but sandman? where is it? (shit, im sounding like a fanboy
am I?....sorry). so yeah, that was mainly my question, why not make a
column about the exelent Sandman by Neil Gaiman?
anyway, saying goodbye to you (maybe not, if you dont mind asking some
other question if something else comes to mind in more time).
PS: I still remember a remarcable quote from a column of yours " Don't
fuck with Batman. Period."
Tipton: Glad to hear you're enjoying the column, sir.
There will definitely be a SANDMAN column in the future. It's just such a big project that I need lots of free time to re-read the books and do the writing, and recent months have been unexpectedly busy with freelance work. I hope to get to it this year, though.
###
Matthew L. writes: Thank you. A couple of days ago (or was it last night? I can hardly tell) I stumbled upon your most recent COMICS 101 column, "And Harry's Wild About Me: The Death of the Green Goblin, Redux." I thoroughly enjoyed seeing the tragic friendship of Peter Parker and Harry Osborn outlined, even though I knew the history quite well.
Since then, I've found my way into your archives, which have absolutely enraptured me. I've read just about every Spider-Man related work (him being my favorite hero and all), as well as your extensive 9-part look at the Dark Knight (and the 3-part column about the superb animated series, with which I agree with you on almost all of the points you made), your look at Superman, the Avengers, your letter to JMS (which I also heartily agree with), your look at the Marvel Star Wars comics, and others.
In the past two days I've spent more time at my computer than I have in the past week it seems, reading the "back issue bin" of your column, if you will. Every time I finish one and resolve to go to bed, I find myself going for "just one more." Through it, I've discovered some things an admitted newbie to comics (I'm only 18, and most of my knowledge is through encyclopedias and the internet) was never privy to, such as what that whole Crisis thing was about, that the Hulk is actually a pretty interesting character, and exactly how much influence the Animated Series has had on the face of the Dark Knight's world.
So, I guess I'm writing to say thanks. Thanks for devoting time to writing about something that many today still see as "kiddie books." Thanks for taking the time to enlighten those who may not have had the advantage to being around when the stories were told, or may not have been "into that sort of thing" at the time.
Thanks, and keep up the amazing work.
One thing I wanted to pick your brain about, though: Spider-Man. The Clone Saga. I know you've stated in your column that you have a distaste for the Clone Saga. While I wasn't a comic fan during the arc (good thing: the kind of kid I was, I probably would have loved it), I have found many articles detailing its successes and failures, and have managed to find ways to read a large chunk of it myself.
And something I have found in that reading: I found that many of the early stories of the Clone Saga, to me at least, were actually quite enjoyable. There were some truly great (or at least marginally decent) stories to come out of that time period, and I thought that Ben Reilly was an interesting character as the Scarlet Spider, at least.
I personally feel that the "good/decent" era of the Clone Saga ended right with the end of Amazing Spider-Man #400, which in my eyes is one of the best Spider-Man tales ever told (despite being essentially worthless - something I'm still miffed about).
I guess what all that buildup is for is this: what did you think of the earlier stages of the Clone Saga? Was there any part that you found enjoyable, or did you hate the whole thing? Did you enjoy it at first, or did the monumental failures and missteps that came later taint the entire thing (which I've heard some people say about JMS' run post-Sins Past)?
Just wanted to pick your brain.
Wow - this turned into a behemoth of an e-mail, when all I wanted to do was congratulate and thank you for the column.
I'll stop typing your ear off, now. Thanks for reading.
Tipton: Thanks for the kind words.
When the idea of the Clone returning first came up, I thought it was a wild, audacious idea, just what the series needed to shake it up. I was even cool with the concept of "Ben Reilly" sticking around and there being two Spidey-types running around, provided they found a way to make the two characters sufficiently different. Where it came off the rails for me was when they decided that Ben Reilly was the real article and Peter Parker was the clone. And this is I think the miscalculation they made that ultimately doomed the Ben Reilly character. What that meant was that every Spider-Man comic I'd ever bought didn't matter because it wasn't the "real Spidey." The Spider-Man I grew up with wasn't really Spider-Man. Naturally, I resented the hell out of this and stopped buying, as did plenty of others, which accounted for them switching it back within the year. Of course, all this led to the worst idea to come out of it, the resurrection of Norman Osborn, which we're now unfortunately stuck with.
###
Ed W. writes: Lemme just compliment you on the great Norman Osbourne
article. It was a great opportunity for me to get to
know a story which I seriously wouldnt have even
thought of picking up before hand. I mean, wasnt it
published during the time there was oh, five or six
spidey titles being put out simultaneously? Im
completely surprised that such a high quality story
was told in one of the offshoot titles, and im sorry
now that i missed it, but glad to read about it now, a
touching addition to the spider-man mythos. This gets
met to thinking, they can bring bucky back for all I
care, its the day Harry Osbourne comes back that im
really giving up on Marvel.
Which at the rate its been going, might happen soon
enough. The house of ideas is increasingly becoming
the house of bad ideas. When I was growing up, I was a
marvel fanboy all the way. I even took those hokey kid
tours to their offices. Heck, I was so loyal I refused
to even look at anything from DC.
It's funny how things change. Today, everything that
DC seems to be doing right Marvel is doing right.
Despite some serious reservations to some major DC
choices (Maxwell Lord), you still gotta hand it to
them for making a smartly written interconnected
universe. Every single title from the most well known
to the most obscure is part of something larger, and
it all fits. Characters are both changing and
evolving, and most of it is being pretty well written.
Identity Crisis, if you agree with the final outcome
or not, was a damn wel l told story. What are we
getting from Marvel? A poor mans Identity Crisis based
on a plot gimmick, which really isnt all that
different than Onslaught. While Geoff Johns is taking
over DC, Bendis is in control of marvel. And while he
has written some pretty good stuff in the past, his
writing is getting increasingly unbearable and
uncoordinated. All of his characters talk smart and
act dumb (i think he thinks its more realistic), there
should be a drinking game for his action scenes when
something akin to this happens:
random avenger: Somebody do something!
(Lots of robots or minions attack)
other interchangeable avenger: Do what???
Avengers are supposed to kick ass, not bicker and make
fun of eachother, and definitly not talk about what
supervillain theyd like to bang. I read this somewhere
else and ill repeat it here, give Marvel to Dan Slott
and that guy who writes the OC.
Anyway, sorry if its getting long but thats not the
only thing I wanted to mention. We all know Batman
Begins is coming out like, now but so is Fantastic
Four. Which, in my opinion, will have a 70% chance of
being complete crap, 20% chance of being mindless
enjoyable entertainment, and 10% of being semigood. To
coincide with this great event have you given thought
of doing a best of FF? I love John Byrne's run but Id
really like to see a walkthrough of Tom Defalco's
lesser known lengthy run. It was full of cheesy
superhero dialogue, but featured some really
entertaining storylines like the cleavage Invisible
Woman, bad ass Franklin Richards from the future,
Thing badly scarred by Wolverine, Johnny Storm finding
out he was married to a Skrull named Lyja all along
who became a great antihero, and the death of Reed
Richards. It was all good fun, what do you think?
Tipton: Yeah, I wasn’t really a fan of that run , and it had the bad fortune of following Byrne’s run, which set a standard topped only by Lee and Kirby.
###
Michael C. writes: Great article. I've always been a fan of the classic Goblin stories (especially the early 70's drug story arc), but I never caught the DeMatteis/Buscema run. I do have one nagging question about Harry Osborn that's been bugging me for years. What the Hell's up with his hair? Now, I assume that it was one of those overly stylistic things that the early Marvel artists did that just look increasingly weird as comic art becomes more realistic (sort of like Kirby's use of those under the chin cowls that go around the whole face, ala Scarlet Witch). But why did every artist have to stick with that weird sideways corn-row look? Was it supposed to be a finger wave? Did he dye it in horizontal stripes to make his head look fatter? Maybe it made sense that he had some freaky doo in college. After all, it was the sixties. But by the 90's it was just distracting. Wasn't it bad enough that he had a widow's peak you could cut glass with? Personally, I always thought the hair was the real reason MJ broke up with him. A girl can overlook a lot of stuff: habitual drug use, a slow but steady descent into madness, a fetish for green latex. But hair that bad just had to be a deal breaker.
Tipton: The white-man's cornrows that both Norman and Harry sport have always been a mystery. Apparently it's genetic...
###
Brian F. writes: Hi, just had to write and thank you for taking the time to write this column. I only just discovered it and have been having a great time going through the archives. I am a born-again DC man now, having been a Marvel guy most of my adolescence. While I don't shun all of the house of M's stuff, I share your opinion that DC shows far more care and concern (until recently) for it's history. This is something that I find far more endearing than throwing out years of history, or making characters gay for no better reason than to generate media attention.
Just this week picked up issues 1-45 of JLI on the strength of your recommendation, and I am having a great time with them. My local shop had them for $1 apiece, you can't beat that! Now having gotten through about half of them, I share your sentiments regarding the treatment of this era in the IC series going on now. Beetles death just seemed so pointless and mean spirited. And as far as Max is concerned, I advance this theory. Perhaps after he succumbed to his bullet wounds in issue #12 he went into a coma. This allowed the Max clone created by the Jackal way back in issue #149 to usurp Max's identity. Now the "real" Max is back from his intensive 18 year training in espionage, surveillance, and covert history revision to take his place as the new Lex Luthor. This Maxwell Lord will from this point on be known as "Ultimate Maxwell Lord."
We now have our "Identity Crisis." It's all becoming clear now huh?
Tipton: Dude! Don’t give them any ideas…
###
Ebbe H. writes: Just wanted to chime in and say thank you for all those grade A columns. I've really enjoyed reading them, and you're single handedly responsible for getting me back into reading superhero comics. I had a few old DC issues from the late seventies and early eighties (and a single Spiderman book where Spidey fights a guy with a pumpkin for a head...) when I was a kid, but it was never enough to turn me on to Superman and his crew in a big way. Recently, however, I've been reading lots of collections and back issues, catching up with DC continuity, and I've been loving it like nothing else. I've been following a lot of your recommendations and I haven't been let down yet. I especially enjoyed Quiver - Green Arrow was a favorite of mine as a kid (from what little I knew about him from a few Hard Travellin' Heroes stories) so this was a real treat. I just finished Formerly Known as Justice League and immediately decided that I need to track down some Giffen era JLI stuff.
Gotta shoot off a few questions: What's with Supes sporting a royal mullet in the early nineties? Did anyone actually think it was cool that Clark Kent looked like Kurt Russell's dorky little brother?
I was reading some JLA issues from the late nineties and suddenly Supes was a funky energy being. What's the deal there?
Finally, will I Can't believe It's Not Justice League ever happen?
If I had to request a column it would have to be ComicCrap, the comic equivalent to Wrestlecrap.com, detailing the worst hero ideas and storylines the industry has ever come up with. Should be good for a laugh.
Tipton: Hey, man, it was the '90s. Mullets were briefly in fashion.
There was a brief period in the late '90s when Superman's powers and costume shifted to the energy-based version due to some sort of accident (I think during the FINAL NIGHT crossover event), and even later, the blue energy Superman split into two beings, blue and red, and when that happened each Superman had a different personality, with the red being emotional and the blue being logical. A short-term sales gimmick. He could change back and forth to Clark Kent, and when he was Clark, he was completely human and mortal. He had energy blasting and shielding powers and could fly. It wasn't all that interesting, to be honest.
"I Can't Believe..." was currently published in the pages of JLA CLASSIFIED, and is now available in a trade paperback.
###
David S. writes: Thanks for devoting your latest article to one of my favorite storylines by one of my favorite creative teams. I agree with you that the latest goblin stories are completely punch less compared to what was gone before. J Marc may be a big softie sometimes and drown you with the psychobabble but you've got to admit that he does know how to tell a story. He was the only writer who ever cared WHY the Red Skull was evil. Nearly everything that he does is heavily grounded in what has gone before and he writes the characters consistently with there most well established incarnations. Well... except when he gets together with Giffen and goes off his prozac. I am really looking forward to what those two do with the Defenders coming up. I could probably write about the guy for hours, but I won't bore you. Thanks for another great article and continue to educate the masses on Comicsology.
Tipton: Yeah, I’ve been really enjoying DEFENDERS.
###
John H. writes: Excellent work on the Green Goblin (Harry Osborn) essay. It was a
great read and brought back many great memories, but there was one
piece of history I really wanted to see mentioned, if only because
it's largely forgotten. The conclusion of the storyline entitled (I
believe) Lifetheft that finally wraps up the mystery of Peter's
"parents," who were really robots or some silly thing created and sent
by the Chameleon. The odder elements aside, it was actually a pretty
affecting story emotionally, but the real kick in the balls was the
last page revelation via recording that Harry was behind it all.
The fact that Harry had been plotting this for some time and that it
was active even after the reconcilation in his death... very, very
powerful stuff, in my opinion. I just wanted to bring this one to your
attention, and I wish more people knew about this story. Hell, if
Norman only knew, maybe he'd finally approve of Harry. Keep up the
great work!
Tipton: Yeah, the storyline of Peter's parents was really a reach -- they were robots? Whatever. Still, the Harry message was a nice touch.
Jonathan S. writes: First they killed Lana, and if that weren't a big
enough shock, then they go ahead and kill Pa! It's
official...this show has really veered far away from
established DC continuity. Until this point, we could
make allowances for a lot. But now? It's a whole new
universe, and the pens that be have left the road
ahead uncharted. Things could really be different
here! Wow! Freshness? What a concept!
Keep writing and I'll keep reading.
Ryall: I was bummed that I read online a few days ago that that was how the episode went down. Happy to see Chloe survive, and I was starting to think more and more that Jonathan might be the one to go, but I do think the show's really gonna miss him. It'll be interesting to see where things go without SMALLVILLE's moral center.
Technically, though, his death IS from established DC continuity, at least pre-CRISIS continuity. Even more, though, it's on movie continuity, which seems to be what they're going for (with the look of the Fortress of Solitude and all). Since Pa Kent died in the first movie soon before Clark left Smallville, this is in keeping with that. Still a bummer, though.
# # #
The Naked Critic writes (while nude, presumably): Dude, usually I'm right there with you on the TV recommendations, but "Love Monkey"...really?
I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you there...although I'm afraid that being respectful will kill my chances of being reprinted in Mail Shoot.
Ryall: Nah, not at all--I accept all comers.
I'm a HUGE "Ed" fan, and I've kinda liked Tom Cavanaugh since his Toronto comedy days...even when he was making those smarmy beer commercials ("If I wanted water, I'd ASK for water!"...it's a Canadian thing)
But I'm sorry, I found "Love Monkey" to be one of the most painful hours of TV I've seen this year.
Mostly, it was the dialogue. To me, this was written as if they wanted to create a male "Sex In The City"...except for the fact that MEN DON'T TALK OR BEHAVE LIKE THIS. I'm sorry, but thirty-something urban males - and I am one - dont have conversations that sound like they were cut from a sub-par episode of "Gilmore Girls"
Ryall: Really? It wasn't THAT bad (that hour should belong to a block of WILL & GRACE and JOEY, or some Friday night ABC shows, or something). Granted, it wasn't great, and I won't exactly set the TiVo to catch it, but it wasn't awful. Tom Cavanaugh is likeable enough to carry some of the forced dialogue. And maybe it was just a show that got music references mostly right (he's right, "Ride the Lightning" IS a great Metallica disc). And the talk of what music to have in the delivery room while his sister's delivering did ring true to me, since I had that same conversation a couple months ago (I settled on a playlist of Ryan Adams, Jack Johnson, My Morning Jacket and Beck).
As for the dialogue not ringing true to real life, if that were the qualification for good TV, most every show would fail. Most shows have hyper-stylized conversational dialogue. I get what you're saying, and I did get the sub-GILMORE vibe, but it didn't bug me that much.
Other than that, and the occasional "Family Guy" quibble, I love the column. I wouldn't have bothered with "My Name Is Earl" and "Everybody Hates Chris" if it weren't for you, and they're 2 of my faves right now. And keep plugging "The Office"...that show gets better every week.
Ryall: Will do--it just got picked up for a third season, too, which is great news.
# # #
Robert M. writes: Hey, as far as I'm concerned, any guest star is a good guest star if it brings more people to the show. (Especially now that Bones and Law & Order are going to share that time slot - yikes...) You'd be surprised how many rabid Xena fans are out there. Never got it myself, but I never watched it that much either.
Ryall: And LOST is on at that same time, too... yeah, TiVo is very useful now. See the next e-mail for more of the same.
About That '70's Show - you totally nailed it. That's exactly what I thought back when they announced Topher Grace was leaving, but they were still continuing the show - "it's going to be like that final year of Happy Days". And that's exactly how it's turned out. I used to love that show, but now it's just sad. I can live without Kutcher (although he had his moments on the show) but "Foreman" was the heart and soul of the show. It's like X-Files without Mulder. Notice how they keep making references to Eric whenever they can - "Eric just called from Africa", "I'm sending Eric a letter", etc. It's pathetic. I can't even watch it anymore. Given that they've been in 1979 for the past five years (some kind of weird time-warp thing I assume), they're long past the point where they should just let it go. The rest of the cast is just there for the paycheck. What's really odd is that "That '70's Show" now resembles an actual "'70's show" - lame and without any edge left. Sad.
Ryall: The "Eric" references are what gave me such a post-Richie HAPPY DAYS vibe. I'm sure they did that on purpose, as an homage to that former '70s show, but in this case (as in that case), a joke doesn't go very far when people realize that the best person on the show is gone. It was good for a time, but, like the '70s, it's time to go.
# # #
Tom A. writes: Have you noticed how many shows hit 100 episodes this year? 24. Smallville, and Scrubs. (with Bernie Mac well on his way) it's interesting being as I have come across each show in a different way.
I was watching Smallville from the beginning, started watching 24 in the third season (and caught up the first two with the DVD's) and have only caught Scrubs here and there. It just doesn't seem like they should all be hitting 100 eps at the same time.
Here's where I should start rambling about the nature of time and how time seems to go faster as we get older, but I'm sure you have stopped reading this by now and have skipped down to........
LOST -- 9 PM, ABC
BONES -- 9 PM, Fox
VERONICA MARS -- 9 PM, UPN
Ok, Fiance got me into Lost, Bones won me with the immortal line: "I don't believe in organised religion, but I know God loves me", and Kevin Smith has recomended Veronica. WHAT THE HELL DO I WATCH?
Ryall: I think I just saw that REBA's hitting 100 this year, too (which seems like 100 too many to me). But I was thinking the same thing, that a lot of shows seemed to be hitting 100. SCRUBS, I didn't really get into until about season 3, either, but I really love it now.
As for Wednesday nights, Joss Whedon recommends Veronica, too... I'd say you watch LOST, since that's the one people talk about/spoil the next day the most, and then TiVo the other two. Yes, TiVo or a DVR is now an essential part of TV viewing.
# # #
Susan M. writes: Regarding Robert Scorpio: I hope you like Monkeys!
Ryall: Um... huh?
Susan responds: Robert is involved in a story that's basically a rip off of Outbreak.
Ryall: You mean GH now has Robert Scorpio and monkeys? I swear, if they get Frisco and Felicia back, it could be a complete renaissance.
The Frisco and Felicia, and Anna Devane, from 20 years ago, I mean. Today's Jack Wagner has gone to seed a bit, I think. All that golfing and drinking seems to be "All [He] Needs" now, to reference his lone '80s musical hit.
I've revealed way too much GH knowledge, haven't I?
Photos of the Week
E-MAIL RYALL | E-MAIL TIPTON | ARCHIVES
| 
