Can Comics Critics Be As Vapidly Ignorant as Political Pundits?: Live-Blogging the Presidential Address on Syria

syria292way_custom-ade1b7712443d957fcdace3a8bc4e16e97b493fe-s6-c30

The live blogging is below in comments (scroll down!)

Below is my concluding response to the speech:

All right. Well, as I said, that was a naueseating and unbelievably disingenuous performance. I guess it’s foolish to think that a President planning the incredibly serious step of dropping bombs on a foreign nation would try to lay out all the facts rather than doing some television courtroom bullshit complete with pictures of dead children and lowered, whispery, “I am sincere” voice.

At a minimum, any serious speech should have acknowledged that we don’t know for sure that Assad used the chemical weapons, and pointed out specifically that there’s a ton of evidence that the rebels did in fact use such weapons a few months back. It would also acknowledge that the “moderate” resistance barely exists, and that al Qaeda and other radical groups have a really good chance of taking over if Assad falls. And it wouldn’t pretend that somehow Assad using chemical weapons means that Iran is going to make a nuclear bomb and kill us all.

Of course, without all of that, there’s basically nothing left. Which to me means we shouldn’t be dropping bombs on Syria. But obviously, the President thinks we should. Why? I still don’t know. He can’t possibly believe the nonsense he was peddling, can he? He can’t be that much of a fool. I know it’s supposed to be all about Israel, but I don’t see what Israel gains by dropping bombs on Assad for maybe using chemical weapons in the interest of maybe slightly helping al-Qaeda take over in Syria.

Maybe someone else can figure it out. I’m just baffled and depressed.

And here’s Richard Cook’s response:

In the spirit of a 15 minute speech, I’ll lay out my opposition to the war as briefly as possible.

Attacking Syria would not be legal, not even if Congress gave him authorization. As I mentioned above, international treaties regarding the use of chemical weapons do not empower any nation to unilaterally enforce them. The use of force – outside of defense – is ultimately governed by the Security Council. Of course, China and Russia would never allow the president to wage a war of choice on Syria, which is why he’s prepared to violate international law (again).

Attacking Syria would not be prudent. There is no guarantee that we would successfully destroy all of Assad’s chemical weapons. We would invite retaliation by Syria or Hezbollah. If the bombing topples the Syrian government, we have no guarantee that the so-called moderate rebels will be able to govern the country. We may very well be helping extremist groups allied with al-Qaeda.

It would not be moral to bomb Syria, especially for the reasons that the president gives. We are allegedly punishing Syria for using chemical weapons, but who are we punishing? Top regime leaders? Military leaders? Their wives and kids and anyone else who happens to be in the room when the bombs hit? What if Assad decides to continue using chemical weapons? Or, more likely what if he just goes back to killing kids with bullets and bombs? What have we accomplished, other than making ourselves feel righteous?

Thanks everyone for reading, and especially Richard for live-blogging with us here. Feel free to leave any thoughts in comments.

The 3-D Gave Me a Headache and Seven More Complaints about The Hobbit

the-hobbit-an-unexpected-journey-movie-2560x1600-2048x1536

1. The movie spends over half an hour introducing the dwarves, yet doesn’t give a single reason to care about any of them. It’s hard to even keep them straight. I remember the king, the fat one, the old one, and the one with the stupid hat. Beyond that, I don’t remember them and don’t care. By any standard of characterization quality, this movie compares poorly with Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs. At least I knew what to think of Grumpy.

2. Somewhere in this great big world, there is a movie that successfully combines musical numbers, snot gags, and rampant violence. The Hobbit is not that movie. The plot retains the cutesy qualities of a children’s adventure, but with incongruous levels of violence. Though now that I think about it, this is familiar territory for a comics blogger.

3. PG-13 violence is remarkable, and not in a good way. The movie has decapitations, eviscerations, multiple stabbings, and a body count in the hundreds, yet there is very little on-screen blood and the camera never lingers on the gruesome consequences of violence. The Hobbit is too gory to be cartoonish yet too tame to be explicit. It’s the uncanny valley of violent entertainment.

4. The action scenes are not exciting. Several reviewers have noted the video gamey quality of the action, particularly the big battle/chase sequence with the goblins. There is shot after shot of indistinguishable dwarves killing indistinguishable orcs. Noah compared it to a “body count video game,” which sounds about right. While body count video games can’t be defended as good art, they can at least provide a base level of entertainment and a pleasurable empowerment fantasy. But watching The Hobbit is like watching someone else play a video game, which  is never fun.

5. Every scene is about 10 minutes longer than it needs to be. It’s bad enough that such a short book was split into a trilogy. But there’s no conceivable reason why each installment has to exceed 2 hours. Though now I can’t help but wonder what sort of scenes were cut from the theatrical release. And what will be included in the extend cut DVDs? No doubt there are many more thrilling scenes of characters sitting around tables and explaining the plot to each other.

6. The film is tragically lacking in hobbit feet close-ups. Why even make The Hobbit if you’re not going to showcase hobbit feet?

7. To harp on the 3-D again, it adds absolutely nothing to the movie experience. 3-D is just a silly gimick, so if you’re going to use 3-D you might as have some fun with the audience (for a great example, see Friday the 13th part 3, which is all rats and marijuana and eyeballs in the third dimension). The Hobbit doesn’t have any fun with the 3-D, so it feels suspiciously like an excuse for theaters to jack up the ticket price.

7.5. Speaking of ticket price, two tickets cost me $38. Thirty eight fucking dollars.

Classic and Not-So-Classic Superheroines: A Brief History in Covers and Panels

Fantomah

First Appearance: Jungle Comics #2 (Feb. 1940)
Created by Fletcher Hanks (a.k.a. Barclay Flagg)
Publisher: Fiction House

.

The Woman in Red (Peggy Allen)

First Appearance: Thrilling Comics #2 (Mar. 1940)
Created by Richard Hughes and George Mandel
Publisher: Nedor Comics

.

Catwoman (Selena Kyle)

First Appearance: Batman #1 (Spring 1940)
Created by Bob Kane and Bill Finger
Publisher: Detective Comics, Inc. (DC)

.

Lady Luck (Brenda Banks)

First Appearance: The Spirit (syndicated – June 2, 1940)
Created by Will Eisner and Chuck Mazoujian
Publisher: Register and Tribune Syndicate

.

Invisible Scarlet O’Neil

First Appearance: Invisible Scarlet O’Neil (syndicated – June 3, 1940)
Created by Russell Stamm
Publisher: The Chicago Times

.

Black Widow (Claire Voyant)

First Appearance: Mystic Comics #4 (Aug. 1940)
Created by George Kapitan and Harry Sahle
Publisher: Timely Comics (Marvel)

.

Red Tornado (Abigail Mathilda “Ma” Hunkel)


First Appearance (as Red Tornado): All-American Comics #20 (Nov. 1940)
Created by Sheldon Mayer
Publisher: All-American Publications (DC)

.

Miss Fury (Marla Drake)

 First Appearance: Black Fury (syndicated – April 6, 1941)
Created by Tarpe Mills
Publisher: Bell Syndicate, reprinted by Timely Comics (Marvel)

.

Bulletgirl (Susan Kent)

First Appearance (as Bulletgirl): Master Comics #13 (April 1941)
Created by Bill Parker and John Smalle
Publisher: Fawcett Comics

.

Hawkgirl (Shiera Sanders)

First Appearance (as Hawkgirl): All Star Comics #5 (July 1941)
Created by Gardner Fox and Dennis Neville
Publisher: All-American Publications (DC)

.

Black Cat (Linda Turner)

First Appearance: Pocket Comics #1 (Aug. 1941)
First Solo Title: Black Cat Comics #1 (Jun. 1946)
Created by Alfred Harvey with art by Al Gabrielle
Publisher: Harvey Comics

.

Phantom Lady (Sandra Knight)

First Appearance: Police Comics #1 (Aug. 1941)
First Solo Title: Phantom Lady #13 (Aug. 1947)
Created by Eisner-Iger Studio, re-designed by Matt Baker
Publisher: Quality Comics; Fox Features Syndicate

.

Miss Victory (Joan Wayne)

First Appearance: Captain Fearless #1 (Aug. 1941)
Created by Charles Quinlan and unknown writer
Publisher: Helnit Publishing Co.

.

Spider Queen (Shannon Kane)

First Appearance: The Eagle #2 (Sep. 1941)
Created by Louis and Arturo Cazeneuve
Publisher: Fox Features Syndicate

.

Wonder Woman (Diana Prince)

First Appearance: All Star Comics #8 (Dec. 1941)
First Solo Title: Sensation Comics #1 (Jan. 1942)
Second Solo Title: Wonder Woman #1 (Summer 1942)
Created by William Marston with art by Harry Peter
Publisher: All-American Publications (DC)

.

Lady Satan

First Appearance: Dynamic Comics #2 (Dec. 1941)
Created by unknown
Publisher: Harry “A” Chesler

.

Spider Widow (Dianne Grayton)

First Appearance: Feature Comics #57 (Jun. 1942)
Created by Frank Borth
Publisher: Quality Comics

.

Liberty Belle (Libby Lawrence)

First Appearance: Boy Commandos #1 (Winter 1942)
Created by Don Cameron and Chuck Winter
Publisher: Detective Comics, Inc. (DC)

.

Mary Marvel (Mary Batson)

First Appearance: Captain Marvel Adventures #18 (Dec. 1942)
Created by Otto Binder and Marc Swayze
Publisher: Fawcett Comics

.

Miss America (Madeline Joyce Frank)

First Appearance: Marvel Mystery Comics #49 (Nov. 1943)
First Solo Title: Miss America Comics #1 (early 1944)
Created by Otto Binder and Al Gabrielle
Publisher: Timely Comics (Marvel)

.

Blonde Phantom (Louise Grant)

First Appearance: All-Select Comics #11 (Sep. 1946)
First Solo Title: Blonde Phantom #12 (Jan. 1947)
Created by Stan Lee and Syd Shores
Publisher: Timely Comics (Marvel)

.

Miss Masque (Diana Adams)

First Appearance: Exciting Comics #51 (Sep. 1946)
Created by unknown
Publisher: Nedor Comics

.

Black Canary (Dinah Drake-Lance)

First Appearance: Flash Comics #86 (Aug. 1947)
Created by Robert Kanigher and Carmine Infantino
Publisher: National Comics (DC)

.

Moon Girl (Claire Lune)

First Appearance: Moon Girl and the Prince #1 (Fall 1947)
Created by Max Gaines, Gardner Fox, and Sheldon Moldoff
Publisher: EC Comics

.

Golden Girl (Betsy Ross)

First Appearance (as Golden Girl): Captain America Comics #66 (Dec. 1947)
Created by Joe Simon and Jack Kirby
Publisher: Timely Comics (Marvel)

.

Merry, The Girl with 1,000 Gimmicks (Merry Pemberton)

First Appearance: Star Spangled Comics #81 (Jun. 1948)
Created by Otto Binder and Win Mortimer
Publisher: National Comics (DC)

.

Bat-Woman (Kathy Kane)

First Appearance: Detective Comics #233 (Jul. 1956)
Created by Edmond Hamilton, Sheldon Moldoff, and Stan Kaye
Publisher: National Comics (DC)

.

Supergirl (Kara Zor-El, Linda Danvers)

First Appearance: Action Comics #252 (May 1959)
Created by Otto Binder and Al Plastino
Publisher: National Comics (DC)

.

Bat-Girl (Betty Kane)

First Appearance: Batman #139 (Apr. 1961)
Created by Bill Finger and Sheldon Moldoff
Publisher: National Comics (DC)

A Fanboy Denied

My introduction to Wonder Woman was not the original Marston/Peters comics. I’m not sure what my first exposure to Wonder Woman was, and it almost seems like I became aware of the character through cultural absorption. As a kid, I saw a few snippets of the TV series with Lynda Carter, I read a few DC comics featuring Wonder Woman (but not her own title), I watched the Justice League cartoon, and played a few superhero video games. I don’t remember which piece of entertainment came first. What I do remember is that my fanboy brain had already constructed the “ideal” Wonder Woman long before I ever picked up a Wonder Woman comic. In other words, I was a Wonder Woman fan but not a Wonder Woman fan.

And therein lay the roots for so much of my dissatisfaction with the character. It would be easy to say that I dislike Wonder Woman comics because they suck. Well … most of them do kinda suck (the less said about the current run, the better), but I’ve put up with sucky comics in other circumstances (X-Men, I’m looking in your direction). But Wonder Woman comics always provoked a hostile reaction from me. Even the runs that were supposed to be good (according to the Internet hive-mind) failed to measure up to my standards. George Perez? Meh. Greg Rucka? Terrible. Gail Simone? Tiresome. They were never going to be as good as “my” Wonder Woman, so why bother?

I first read a collection of Marston stories about four years ago, well after I had formed my views on Wonder Woman. Needless to say, it was like nothing I had ever read in superhero comics. Bondage, cross-dressing, and lesbian subtext in a comic marketed to children!  It was idiosyncratic, to put it mildly.

 

It was obsessive, fetishistic, and outright insane, to put it less mildly. And it was fantastic! Most superhero comics aspire to little more than genre hackery, and many fail to measure up to even that lowly bar. But Marston’s Wonder Woman was a personal and ideological work. Regardless of what one thinks of Marston’s values, his comic stands out as a rare artistic achievement in mainstream comics, a fusion of radical feminism, patriotism, BDSM, and commercialism.

Regardless of its strengths, I should have hated this comic, considering how different it  was from my vision of Wonder Woman. Why is she getting tied up all the time? Why does she say ridiculous things like “Suffering Sappho?” What’s with the giant kangaroos? Etta Candy … what the fuck?

But I couldn’t find fault with Marston, as much as my ego wanted to, because his Wonder Woman was far better than mine (or any other version of Wonder Woman I had encountered). My Wonder Woman was nothing more than a grab-bag of traits: She’s strong (but not mannish)! She’s fierce (but not in a mean way)! She’s smart (but not nerdy)! She’s sexy (but not trampy)! I hadn’t created the perfect version of Wonder Woman, instead I’d assembled a highlight reel from every comic, TV series, or game featuring the character. And when I pasted these traits together they amounted to nothing more than another bland, inoffensive superhero. Marston’s Wonder Woman was born out of actual ideas. Those ideas were crazy (and occasionally creepy), but there was genuine thought and creativity behind his stories. Nothing I dreamed up has ever come close.

When I was younger, I tended to judge the quality of a work by how thoroughly it pandered to my tastes. If something hit the correct fanboy buttons in my brain, it was deemed good. Marston’s Wonder Woman failed the “fanboy test” in almost every way, but I came around to appreciating the work. And the more I appreciated Wonder Woman, the more I came to realize that my particular vision of the character (and comics in general) was fandom at its most banal. I won’t go so far as to say that reading Wonder Woman triggered an epiphany. Around the same time I was reading Marston I was also reading Moore, Ware, and a dozen other great comic creators. But Wonder Woman was one of the first comics that stifled my inner fanboy and forced me to reevaluate my standards for comics and other media.

I’m still not entirely immune to the siren call of slick genre product, but I have an easier time distinguishing mindless fun from great art. And I understand now that “good” doesn’t mean “identical to the tastes I had as a teenager.” So thank you for that, William Marston.

_____________
The entire roundtable on the Marston/Peter Wonder Woman is here.

Your Favorite Uncle – Uncle Sam in Posters, Cartoons, and Comics

According to the Internets, Uncle Sam was the unintended creation of Samuel Wilson, who inspected meat purchased by the U.S. government during the War of 1812. Wilson’s assistant, Elbert Anderson, would ship him barrels of meat stamped with “E.A.” and “U.S.” The meat-packers working for Anderson had no idea what “U.S.” stood for until some smart-ass decided that it meant “Uncle Sam.” The joke spread along with the meat, and a national character was born. To celebrate Independence Day, here is a collection of Uncle Sam images from various print media.

1800s

In Harper’s Weekly (1862)

CAPTION: “Go ahead, Boys: I’ll take care of the Wives and Babies. GOD bless you!”

.

In Harper’s Weekly (1864)

CAPTION: (to Young John Bull). “There, JACKY—there’s one of Daboll’s New Fog-Whistles for you. You’re always in a Fog about our affairs, you know. Now go and blow it upon Cape Race, and say it was UNCLE SAM sent you.”

.

By Thomas Nast in Harper’s Weekly (1869)

.

By Thomas Nast (1876)

CAPTION: “CUR-TAIL-PHOBIA. — U.S. ‘Because he steals? You are, as usual, ‘Mr. Statesman,at the wrong end.'”

.

By Grant Hamilton in Judge Magazine (1884)

.

By Joseph Keppler in Puck Magazine (1895)

TITLE: “Uncle Sam’s Dream of Conquest and Carnage – Caused by Reading the Jingo Newspapers”

.

In The Ram’s Horn (1896)

CAPTION: “EMIGRANT – ‘Can I come in?’ UNCLE SAM – ‘I ‘spose you can; there’s no law to keep you out.”

.

In Sound Money (1896)

CAPTION: Cleveland holds Uncle Sam back while Spain pays old Rothschild’s bonds with Cuban blood.”

.

By William Allen Rogers (1898)

TITLE: “Uncle Sam’s New Class in the Art of Self-Government

.

Early 1900s

By Emil Flohri in Judge Magazine (1907)

TITLE: “Uncle Sam – ‘I didn’t do that way with Cuba'”

.

By J.K. Renour in Puck Magazine (1911)

TITLE: (J.P. Morgan) – “The Helping Hand”

.

Poster by James Montgomery Flagg (1917)

Originally the cover for the July 6, 1916 issue of Leslie’s Weekly.

.

Poster by James Montgomery Flagg (1918)

.

Poster by W. Carson (1918)

.

By Norman Rockwell in The Saturday Evening Post (1928)

TITLE: “Uncle Sam Takes Wings”

.

1930s

By Miguel Covarrubias (1933)

TITLE: “The Wailing Wall of Gold”

.

By Paulo Garretto in Vanity Fair (1934)

TITLE: “The Tattooed Man”

.

 

By Berry Ardin (?) in LIFE Magazine (1934)

TITLE: “Dr. New Deal”

.

 

By Frank Lea in The Country Gentleman (1936)

TITLE: “Which Way to Prosperity?”

.

1940s

Cover by Lou Fine (1940)

.

Cover by Jack Binder (1942)

.

Cover by Gill Fox (1942)

.

Cover by Reed Crandall (1942)

.

Poster by McClelland Barclay (1942)

.

Poster by N.C. Wyeth (1943)

.

Cover by Alex Kotzky (1944)

.

Poster by James Montgomery Flagg (1944)

.

By Kukryniksy in Krokodil (1947)

TITLE: “Equal Partners” (addressing the creation of NATO)

Kukryniksy was the pen name for three cartoonists who worked for the Moscow satirical paper, Krokodil.

.

1950s

By Jerry Costello (c. 1950)

.

Art by unknown (c. 1950s?)

CAPTION: “Don’t Misbehave!”

.

By D.R. Fitzpatrick (1951)

TITLE: “The Firing of McArthur”

.

By John Fischetti for Collier’s (1953)

TITLE: “Time for a New Declaration”

.

1960s

By John Collins (1960)

TITLE: “Look, I have a beard too!”

.

By The Vietnam Solidarity Campaign (1967)

.

By Herbert Block in The Washington Post (1968)

.

Cover by Norman Mingo (1969)

.

1970s

Poster by The Committee to Help Unsell the Vietnam War (1971)

.

Cover by Nick Cardy (1973)

.

Cover by Ernie Chan (1976)

.

Cover by Rich Buckler and Vince Colletta (1976)

Freedom Fighters was canceled by issue 15.

.

1980s

By Ray Osrin in The Plain Dealer (1980)

.

Cover by Gil Kane (1983)

.

Cover by Jerry Ordway (1984)

.

Cover by Lorenz (1988)

.

1990s

By Mischa Richter in The New Yorker (1991)

CAPTION: (Lady Liberty to Uncle Sam) “I say we renounce world leadership and just have fun.”

.

Cover by Alex Ross (1997)

.

2000s

By Gary Varvel in The Indianapolis Star (2001)

.

Wallpaper by Alex Ross (c. 2001)

.

Cover by Daniel Acuna (2006)

.

Cover by Dave Johnson (2007)

.

By Nick Craig (2008)

.

By Pat Bagley in The Salt Lake Tribune (2008)

.

By Mike Keefe in The Denver Post (2011)

.

By Nate Beeler in The Washington Examiner (2011)

.

_____________________

Many of the earliest Uncle Sam images were found at SonoftheSouth.net

The cover of National Comics #26 now correctly attributed.

She’s just not into you, Max

I’m continuing my read through the “Big Book of Martyrs,” a collection of short biographies of – you guessed it – martyrs. The comic was written by John Wagner in colloboration with numerous artists. Last week, I read the entry on St. Olaf of Norway, who never behaved like a saint and didn’t actually die as a martyr. For this week, I read about a saint who didn’t persecute pagans, but was instead persecuted by them (assuming she actually existed).

As the legend goes, St. Catherine (early 4th century A.D.) was born into a wealthy family in Alexandria, Egypt. At a young age, she converted to Christianity and declared that she was “married” to the Christ-child. She was attactive enough to catch the eye of the Roman emperor Maxentius, but she rejected his advances. In an effort to win her over, he sent philosophers to convert her back to paganism, but she convinced them to convert to Christianity. This didn’t go over well with Max.

Artwork by Robin Smith

Continue reading

I have seen the future, and it is MOTION!

Spider-Woman: Agent of SWORD, Episodes 1-3

Written by Brian Michael Bendis
Art by Alex Maleev
Spider-Woman/Jessica Drew voiced by Nicolette Reed

This is my first foray into comics blogging, and rather than waste everyone’s time discussing primitive sheets of paper, I thought I’d take a look at the cutting edge of comics technology. Books are for Luddites, motion comics are the future, so what does the future look like?

Short answer: a really cheap cartoon with an impenetrable plot.

Long answer:
After her solo title was canceled in 1983, Jessica Drew vanished into character limbo while the Spider-Woman name got passed around to various heroines, none of whom found any lasting success. In the mid-2000s, Brian Michael Bendis pulled Drew from obscurity and placed her on his high profile revamp of the Avengers. Spider-Woman: Agent of SWORD is the first serious attempt at a Spider-Woman ongoing in more than 20 years, as well as Marvel’s first go at motion comics.

Considering that motion comics are sold through iTunes rather than the Direct Market, you’d think that Marvel would target the casual “I liked Downey, Jr. in that movie” fan. But Marvel is nothing if not predictable, and instead the story launches out of the last mega-crossover, Secret Invasion (also by Bendis). Jessica Drew was apparently kidnapped by Skrulls, a shape-shifting alien race, and replaced by the Skrull queen. So the Spider-Woman that readers had been following for the last couple of years in New Avengers was a fake. Now the real Spider-Woman is back and she’s understandably pissed. Lucky for her, Abigail Brand, director of S.W.O.R.D. (Sentient World Observation and Response Department), offers Spider-Woman a job hunting down Skrulls, thus allowing her to work out her issues and beat up illegal aliens at the same time. Spider-Woman’s first assignment takes her Madripoor, the crime capital of Asia. As these things always go, her mission quickly goes to shit and she’s on the run from HYDRA (like G.I. Joe’s Cobra, but no ninjas). And just when you think things can’t get more complicated, in episode 3 Spider-Woman is targeted by the Thunderbolts, a super-powered hit squad run by Norman Osborn, the Big Bad of Marvel’s current Dark Reign mega-crossover. In other words, it’s a story only a hardcore superhero fan could love.

Thankfully, Alex Maleev’s artwork is easier to appreciate. His penciling is fairly realistic and detailed, but he applies multiple layers of color to his work, causing every image to appear dark and washed-out. While the coloring can make certain details hard to see, it effectively establishes the mood and atmosphere of an espionage thriller.

The main attraction though of Spider-Woman: Agent of SWORD is neither the story nor the art, but the format. Each motion comic episode runs about 10 minutes, and consists of three types of visuals. The first type is a sequence of still images accompanied by dialogue and other sound. During conversation scenes, the images are frequently re-used. The second slightly more sophisticated visual involves moving an image in the foreground while keeping the background still. The third type of visual, which is used for the vehicle chase scenes, is just low budget computer animation (which seems like cheating to me).

Several critics have accused Spider-Woman, and motion comics in general, of simply being low budget animation, and there’s a pretty strong case for that. But comparing motion comics only to animation ignores their biggest flaw, namely that the subtle communication between artist and reader is sacrificed without replacing it with the advantages of actual animation. While it probably goes without saying, comics are a sequence of artistic panels usually accompanied by text. But there’s more to reading a comic than just proceeding from top-left to bottom-right. The layout of panels, their size, the level of detail, and the amount of text per panel are all part of the communication between artist and reader. Motion comics take most of that away. Every “panel” is now just another background that fits the standard aspect ratio. And the pacing of the story is set by the motion comic producers rather than the artist and readers. Motion comics, in short, are something less than comics AND something less than animation.

Of course, motion comics do have one element that comics can never have: sound. The music and sound effects in Spider-Woman are used quite well, adding to the atmosphere of the story but generally remaining unobtrusive. The dialogue and Spider-Woman’s inner monologue are another matter. Bendis has a peculiar approach to the English language, which seems to consist mostly of repetitions, redundant statements, and pointless asides. Presumably Bendis is going for realism, but I can happily say I’ve never talked to anyone who speaks as strangely as the characters in this comic. I feel pity for the voice actors who had to read his lines and try to make them sound like something non-assholes would say. Nicolette Reed, who voices both Spider-Woman and Madame Hydra, doesn’t seem to quite know what to do with her lines, so Spider-Woman comes across as flat (and British?) while Madame Hydra quickly becomes obnoxious. But her performance seems Oscar-worthy compared to her co-stars. Particularly shameful are the “actors” who voice the Madripoor police detectives, who seem to take the Breakfast at Tiffany’s approach to portraying Asian men.

So the execution of Marvel’s first motion comic is not so good. Maybe a better example would change my opinion of the medium, but I doubt it. Still, it gave Marvel an excuse to come up with another corny character theme song. Behold, the Spider-Woman music video!

Update: the entire first episode is available for free for a limited time on Youtube. Check it out if you’re interested.

Update 2: David Weman was kind enough to provide a link to an animated short based upon Edgar Allen Poe’s “The Telltale Heart.” It isn’t quite the same thing as motion comics, but it’s a similar combination of still images and simple animation. And needless to say, Poe is a somewhat better writer than Bendis.