Thursday, October 26, 2006

This is barely enough to warrant a Spoiler Warning

Well, I got Seven Soldiers and was planning to type out my insights. Then I read it, and realized it's going to need a digestion period. I'm still in a state of gibbering giddyness over the Granty-goodness contained within.

In the meantime, here's a panel that made me smile. Look at the face and hair just beneath Arthur's arm. Am I seeing what I think I'm seeing in ProtoCamelot?

I'm going to decide that I am, and that it totally makes up that issue of 52 I saw beach bunny fembots instead of lady mad scientists.

But the writer still has a strike against him for Lois Lane not getting to punch anyone in that All-Star Superman issue where she had powers for a day.


  1. Those were fembots? I missed where an answer was given on that.

  2. I'm still on the fence about how I feel about the issue. It seems every moment done well was negated by something horribly indulgent on Morrison's part.

    The artwork was beautiful, and hat's off to JH Williams for morphing his style to fit the tone of each character (unless other uncredited artists were actually used. Anyone know?). However, I couldn't shake the sense that Morrison's heart just wasn't in the wrap-up to his loopy epic. In fact, he seems to have lost his enthusiasm at some point during Wave Two of the Seven Soldiers titles. That apparent loss of enthusiam played a bit role in this issue's incoherency....but then again, with so many big ideas and widescreen concepts introduced throughout the seven titles, it's tough to see how anyone (focused or not) could satisfyingly tie it all together somehow.

    That said, I still think Morrison was on "auto-pilot" here, since he seemed to be reverting to an almost caricatured version of his writing style. Clever turns of phrases for the sake of cleverness. Loopy concepts for the sake of loopiness, and just a general sense of "Hey, I can get away with it, cuz....hey....I'm GRANT MORRISON...rockstar conceptualist!"

    However, winding it all back to the beginning of my post....I'm still not quite ready to disown the book just yet. The artwork alone merits a second look.

  3. Did it come out? I don't think I saw it in my store on Wednesday?

  4. I like how you said "Granty goodness" about an issue which revolved around the New Gods.

  5. But the writer still has a strike against him for Lois Lane not getting to punch anyone in that All-Star Superman issue where she had powers for a day.

    Punching is the very least of the things Superman can do. Maybe Lois realized that and focused on the esoteric, the unknowable that his powers offer: flight, hearing, vision that's beyond the human norm, plus invulnerability. Being able to sit at the bottom of the Mariana trench one moment and then fly into orbit the next.

    Punching would be at the very bottom of my list, anyway.

  6. Punching would be at the very bottom of my list, anyway.

    Mine too.

    But this is Lois Lane we're talking about.

    I'm just saying...she'd totally punch someone.

  7. Glad to hear you got a copy this week after all, Ragnell!

    The Lois problem isn't merely that she didn't punch anyone -- it's that we didn't get to see her do much of anything at all with the powers. The setup promised a story where Lois would get to experience how life is for Superman, and presumably understand him better...but instead it was just about three superhumans quarrelling over her, and that story didn't require her to have the super powers at all.

    Well written story, and a lot of clever touches in it...but not the story that should have been in that issue.

  8. Surprising nobody, punching would be at the top of my list, right above "kicking" and "rocking out."

    Anyway, that face: Is that Tarot?

  9. I'd've liked for it to be a few pages longer. One of the Soldiers didn't seem to have a denouement, and the frame-story was a little weak. Otherwise, though, it packed quite a wallop on nearly every page and will be good for many rereadings.

    Thanks, Ragnell, for repeatedly defending Sir Ystin when the blogospheric conventional wisdom is pretty dismissive of her story.


  10. The f***? People didn't like Ystina? I would have preferred Ystine, but I swear she's the breakout star of the series -- that final page with her in #1 sets us up for a brilliant series which will probably never come to pass but GOD it would be awesome. Her and Misty starting up a new round table...

  11. I'd have done nothing BUT punch people, all day. That's just me. Flying would be only the method of getting from A to B for more punching.

    Possibly that says terrible things about me, but I'm okay with that.


  12. Uh, if there are women knights, why did Ystina cross-dress?

  13. Kevin -- Lois is a woman of action who stood around doing pretty much nothing all issue. Issue 2 was a much better story for her than issue 3, which is a real shame. Especially as it didn't specifically feature her decking the one who stole the necklace.

    Chris -- I thought it was Guinevere, but yes, that is a Balentine face, isn't it?

    Josh -- Thanks, but I'm like Ben. I thought she was the breakout star! I'm hoping she shows up very soon now.

    Zarathrustra -- Got me. I thought the same thing. But it could be that knight was a special case, maybe that was Queen Guinevere (or the aforementioned prophesizing goddess Morrigan), or a female version of Lancelot or Gawain. Someone extraordinary or even someone who came to the table after Ystina showed up in drag.

    Clearly, we need more Shining Knight backstory. And I'd like to see Morrison's version of the Mabinogion fleshed out.

  14. Too bad it isn't Valda, from Arak, Son of Thunder.