I think I should start this review by thanking Brian
Azzarello & J.G. Jones for getting right to the point with this one. That nervous
feeling I had about Cooke’s plans for the Minutemen and Silk Spectre series in
the upcoming issues is non-existent when Comedian #1. Without wasting any time
or giving me any false hope with a decent first issue they released a comic
book that is both ridiculous and offensive fight off the bat. Maybe that’s
being a little unfair, but I mean, the Kennedys? Marilyn Monroe? Why? Is it
because much of the events of Watchmen take place in the 60s, so everything in
the 60’s is caused by the Comedian? Is he Forest Gump all of the sudden? Why
not have Comedian murder Paul McCartney and set up a look-a-like in his place
named Billy Shears, it seems to make just as much sense as this concept. Before
I go off on a fan-boy rant, let me add some structure to this review.
Art
The art is very detailed
which, if you’ve read the other
two reviews (hopefully someone has), you know I like this. I felt that Jones
had an issue projecting the tone of the story’s panels onto his character’s
faces though. It seems that most of the time the characters faces don’t match
their conversation or setting. Another thing I wasn’t fond of was how by
this point it’s been 4 years since Jon Osterman rematerialized as Dr. Manhattan
and yet nothing seemed affected by his presence. It may have been too early for
the electric cars to have been developed, but even a picture of Kennedy and Dr.
Manhattan on JFK’s desk would’ve at least been an acknowledgement of his
existence. I know this is a nitpick, but it’s part of the reason why the world
created for the in the story didn’t feel anymore like Watchmen than it did a
Spiderman comic.
Story
I can see what Azzarello was trying to do with this
story, but it just didn’t work and especially not as a set up for a 6 issue
series. First things first: why the Kennedys? I don’t recall the Comedian ever
meeting John Kennedy in Watchmen, let alone the whole family. Dr. Manhattan met
the Kennedys, but not the Comedian. Moore treated this character as someone who
didn’t care much about politics – other than for his own gain/enjoyment – but
if he swayed any way, evidence suggests that it would be towards right-wing
politics. He had been known to associate with Ford, and Nixon who are
Republican leaders, so why choose the Kennedys for this story? My guess is that
Azzarello is doing something similar to what Snyder did in the Watchmen film
where he projected some of his own political views onto the narrative, such as
taking shots at the Bush administration. That’s fine if you want to try to
convey that message, but do it in a smarter way than this. Azzarello, like most
Watchmen readers, found the Comedian to be an enjoyable character and the
possibility that a character he likes could have opposing political views to
him makes absolutely no sense in his mind. The Comedian must have had a reason
for becoming so right-wing, and that reason is – Jackie O being secretly evil?
The murder of JFK? I’m not sure. I am pretty confident that whatever the reason
is, it’s probably stupid.
Jackie Kennedy asks the Comedian to murder Marylin Monroe
(in the most awkwardly drawn and written panels in the story); because of the
alleged affair she had with JFK. I guess this is believable in the context of
Watchmen, but I feel no evidence is given as to why Blake doesn’t just tell her
where to get off. There is no discussion of money. Are we supposed to believe
that Blake cares about catching this gangster Giancana and that he murders her
for that reason? It’s possible that it would earn him some good publicity but
if this is the case, then why didn’t he wait around their place and kill Giancana
too? And what was the deal with Jackie trying to get Blake to admit that he
loved the Kennedys? Too many questions and I have no answers. There was barely
any relationship development between Blake and Jackie. The whole interaction is
out of left field and just seemed phony to me.
It’s clear that Azzarello was trying to take the less
predictable route and not have the Comedian be the murderer of JFK. I can
appreciate the risk he took, but his story is so ridiculous that in the end he
should have just stayed true to Moore’s text (or in this case, what was hinted
in his text). The Monroe sequence was just as out-of-nowhere and awkward as the
Jackie pages, and lent nothing to Blake’s character development.
I’m on the fence about how I felt towards the inclusion
of Moloch in this issue. On the one hand, the sequence is less offensive than
anything else in the issue. On the other hand, it seems like they were trying
to force too much emotion into the final panel and it just ended up feeling
fake. The sequence that tried to mirror the interaction between Moloch and the
Blake in Watchmen (where Blake asks for booze and they are crying during the
JFK murder announcement) just felt like it was trying too hard to impress the
reader, and was a little off putting. Is Blake supposed to lose faith in the
world now because of JFK’s murder and ultimately become the loose cannon,
murderer that he is in Watchmen? And if this is the case, then how do you
explain all his loose cannon, and murdering behavior before Before Watchmen?
More questions, still no answers.
Final Thoughts
I feel that Azzarello was trying to explore the “glimmer
of gentleness” side of Comedian, which the reader only infers from the events
Watchmen. He took it too far into ridiculous waters and failed miserably. One
of the characteristics of Blake’s “soft side”, which Sally Jupiter falls for is
that this gentleness is so rare. Why write him as a sympathetic character for a
full issue? I didn’t get that moral dilemma, from this issue that I got when I
sympathised with Blake in Watchmen, it just felt forced.
From the get-go, the tone of the story was off and
Comedian’s personality traits that were developed in Watchmen, were not present
at all. This review only scratches the surface of what’s wrong with this story,
I could go on for hours. The only thing that gives this issue retribution is
the fact that it is so ridiculous and offensive, that it’s actually kind of
funny. This is the comic book equivalent of Tommy Wiseau’s The Room.
No comments:
Post a Comment