First impressions...a somewhat incoherent ramble I'll probably think better of tomorrow morning

[shadowkat]

This is not good - have two clocks on my nightstand. One is still 9:53 (standard time) and one is 10:44 (daylight savings time) - okay the 9:53 one is tad fast for standard. Makes things a mite confusing. I keep thinking it is earlier than it is. Haven't changed the 9:53 one because it's too hard and it's still here because it is in reality a CD player mixed with a clock radio. I play the CD's on it at night.

Bought and read the conclusion of The Long Way Home - the first arc of the Buffy S8 comics. Pretty much concluded the way I thought it would and there weren't any surprises for me. I don't know if this is because I've read a lot of comics in my life times so could see where the writer was heading within the format or if I have overanalyzed the series to the extent that I can figure it out or I've read too much Whedon or...fill in the blank.
This may be one of the reasons I'm not loving the books as much as I did the series, no surprises. I more or less figured out all the twists ahead of time.

Also, it might just be me, but Whedon has gotten a bit melodramatic and preachy lately, or maybe he was always like this and I didn't notice? Ponders. And as you know, I have a high tolerance for melodrama. Oh well at least there weren't any lame sex jokes or if there were they went right over my head. Wouldn't be the first time.

Jeanty's art is not thrilling me. It feels very amateurish and uneven. You have to understand something - I read comics for the artwork first, the writing second. I've been known to pick up a graphic novel for the art. And I like innovative, crazy, beautiful, realistic artwork and know many of the graphic novel artists by name. Alex Ross, Tim Sale, Frank Urruh, Jim Lee, Jae Le...and there's the brilliant cover artist doing these comics - Joan something. Terry Moore's Strangers in Paradise has killer artwork. So does the DC books Kingdom Come. I started reading comics for the ART. I loved how they could bring a character to life with a few lines. Frank Miller has a killer style by the way. Next time you are in a comic store - pick up a novel, don't read it, just look at the art.

Why am I so weird about art?
Ah, because I tried to do it. So did my brother. And my father. I used to paint the X-men.
Was really good at it in my early twenties, but haven't drawn in ten years, so you get out of practice. I don't tend to appreciate art that I can do. It's the stuff I can't I appreciate. Or the innovative stuff. New and different.

Jeanty's artwork looks like a lot of the bargain basement X-men comics I've read. It's okay.
Better than Fray. Better than some of the stuff in Spike and Dru or Spike vs. Dracula. And a lot better than some of the other stuff out there. Serviceable.

The writing? Sigh. I love Whedon's writing, obviously. But...I like it better on the X-men.
There's just something off and I can't put my finger on what it is.

As I explained in a prior post, we all have our buttons and kinks, we all have things that make us jump up and down for joy and grump about in a funk. Sometimes we can explain why.
Sometimes not.

It's not that I disliked this arc. I like it well enough. I just was oddly disappointed in it. And I don't really know why. Unsatisfied? Maybe because you have to wait sooo long for each issue. The anticipation, even if you aren't expecting much...or maybe it's because I'm not interested in the story Whedon feels he has to tell, maybe because I already know it - far better than Whedon does and find it oddly annoying that Whedon, a man, with an all male staff, in a heavily male industry, is writing a story about men having troubles with women in power. It feels almost hypocritical in a way. It reminds me of an ex-boyfriend of mine who prided himself on being a feminist - yet he was controlling to the point of being suffocating. I remember attending a date-rape seminare in college years ago and the counselor stating, a male counselor, that all men are chauvinists and potential rapists, all men. That it is impossible for a man to be a feminist in quite the same way. Or to understand.

Whedon's tone in this story feels oddly patronizing. It's the small little girl - who is deliberately under developed, no big busts, not tall, what Whedon considers average and normal - and people are saying that is brilliant. And breaking the rules? Hello. Kitty Pryde. And many others. It feels like a man's fantasy again.

If you want to read a book about female empowerment - hunt down some of the Magnas. Or check out some of the female comic book writers - the underground. Such as Terry Moore.
They aren't action oriented. So there's that.

Don't get me wrong - I'm not reading them. I like the shiny superheroes in their shiny costumes. And I like having a female hero fighting people. So I will keep buying the Buffy comics. But, the tone and story...it wasn't new. And it felt oddly patronizing. And I'm not entirely sure why.

That said, there are things I like. I liked the asian slayer...with the hair Buffy adored, although I have a hunch Joss will kill her in the next issue. It's almost obvious at this point. No spoilers, just a hunch. I also enjoyed the bit with Dawn, even if Dawn's comment to Buffy seemed odd. Thought Willow had brown eyes? Not blue? Could be wrong. Doesn't matter. I liked how Willow and Xander are drawn and portrayed here. Although Willow still wears the oddest clothes. So does Xander for that matter.

Sort of looking forward to the Faith arc. Curious to see what Brian K. Vauhgn does with the characters.

Oh the letters page? Is it just me or are some of these people just a little wacked?
Honestly, it was only a tv series. Get a grip. I think the editor was laughing his ass off at some of them - or that was my impression.

Comments

[ponygirl2000.livejournal.com]

After reading the spoilers and reviews for this issue I'm thinking I may be able to hold off buying it and wait for the trades. The last issue made me so cranky and this one doesn't sound like it would be any better. Even the whedonesque crowd is down on it and they're usually the big boosters.

It's just so frustrating because AXM is sooo good that I can't make any kind of 'getting used to the medium' excuses. Buffy just feels like Joss dashed it off for fun and didn't give it much thought. Le sigh.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

I'd recommend skipping. What happens, you can more or less see a mile away. And the surprises aren't great.

It's odd, but I'd have to say the best two issues of this arc were probably 1 & 2 - where we got a smidgen of character development.

The main problem? He's not furthering the characters any. They don't start out in one place emotionally and end up in another towards the end of the arc. Reading it felt a lot like reading a fanfic in some ways. Very much just something he did for *the money* or *kicks*.

In AXM - I feel more passion. Whedon actually takes risks in that one. And seems to have something to say. It's really odd, but I think Whedon takes the X-men more seriously as characters and loves them more than his own?
Odd. I'd have thought it was the reverse. But I've heard more than fanfic writer describe much the same thing - they find it easier to write about characters in the Buffyverse than create their own. I don't understand it because it's not how I write...but I think it makes sense in a way. TV writers, comic writers and script doctors such as Whedon are writers for hire - they spend most of their lives playing with others characters. Whedon may very well look at the Buffy characters as Fox's and just see himself as yet another writer permitted to play with them? Don't know.
But I'd agree his AXM is sooo much better than Buffy S8, actually so is his Runaways, as is the art on both books - which could be part of the problem. In comics the artist does matter quite a bit, sometimes more than the writer does.

[aycheb.livejournal.com]

He's not furthering the characters any. They don't start out in one place emotionally and end up in another towards the end of the arc.
Don’t take this wrong but is that really the function of a season opener? Any journey needs a starting place and I thought what this story did extremely well was to gradually reveal what that place was. Like a cubist painting in every issue we see Buffy from a different angle, contemplative in the first, confident respected leader in the second (but still subject to nightmare vulnerabilities). Warm even affectionate reunited with her old friends in the third, implacable against the enemy in the fourth. Overall it’s the Buffy we loved, new and all grown up but not infallible (I was both shocked when she found Ethan dead and shocked that I cared) and with big new grown up challenges looming on the beautiful horizon. Actually I think there is quite a dramatic transition, from wondering what the hell she was doing in the opening monologue to deciding what she had to do on that final page.

[ponygirl2000.livejournal.com]

Have you been reading Astonishing X-Men? Because I think that's been providing excellent examples of having character development and emotional pay-offs within each issue. With the Buffy comic after the first issue I really haven't been feeling any of those things, just re-statements of those initial impressions. That's just me of course, but it's been frustrating. Hopefully future arcs and reading it collected will make things better for me.

[aycheb.livejournal.com]

I have, at least up to the third trade thingy and while that was quite wonderful much of the wonderfulness came from building on threads that had been set up in the first two. The first one was interesting enough to want to read more but I didn't feel I knew the characters at all well at the end of it and the big reveal about Colossus being ressurrected didn't mean much to me not having read any X-men prior to that. I can appreciate it much better with hindsight but not at the time.

The Buffy ones, because there's not that massive learning curve at the beginning, I've actully been quite impressed with the layered way the story is structured. For example in the first issue there's just a hint that she's connecting with the troops, the second confirms that and so on. I have more detailed impressions here (http://aycheb.livejournal.com/52334.html#cutid1) if you're interested But there be big spoilers for the fourth issue.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Don’t take this wrong but is that really the function of a season opener?
Uh last I checked it was a comic book not a television series. Comic books don't work the same way. There is no such thing as *season opener* in a comic book series. From your comments, I don't think you understand the medium and are treating it as a tv series. They are different mediums, with different requirements. And different rules.

I am critiquing the series based on the medium it is in. A medium that I happen to know a bit about and love. As does Joss Whedon who has read numerous comic books and written several.

Comic books are more like *novels* than tv shows. Each four issue arc acts as a novel. They even state as much in the letter section - this was our first arc. It was called *The Long Way Home* - a book complete in of itself. The next comic is a standalone issue focusing on one character. The next focuses entirely on Faith - the other characters from what I've read won't come into play. Each writer works on their own little arc. You do not have to read all the comics to follow what is going on. That's the nature of comic books.

So - a better comparison would be to compare the Long Way Home to the FIRST SEASON of Buffy not to the first episode.

Any journey needs a starting place and I thought what this story did extremely well was to gradually reveal what that place was. Like a cubist painting in every issue we see Buffy from a different angle, contemplative in the first, confident respected leader in the second (but still subject to nightmare vulnerabilities). Warm even affectionate reunited with her old friends in the third, implacable against the enemy in the fourth.

I guess my answer, respectively is, so what?

I already know all this. That's a given. I wanted growth. And you can do that in four comics. Heck - Whedon already has in the Astonishing X-Men he developed and advanced those characters quite a bit in the space of four issues. He didn't tell us what we already knew. He didn't retread all ground. Yet at the same time he showed for those characters what he shows for Buffy above.

What you state above isn't hard to do. That's easy. What is hard to do is advance the character. The dreamscape was an excellent opportunity to do that. In my opinion it did little more than tell us what we already know.
As are villians -but again we revisited old ground.

Overall it’s the Buffy we loved, new and all grown up but not infallible (I was both shocked when she found Ethan dead and shocked that I cared) and with big new grown up challenges looming on the beautiful horizon.

This is subjective isn't it? When you say *we* - you should say *I*. It's not the Buffy I loved. I wanted something different as I stated clearly above in my post. I won't repeat what I stated regarding those challenges and beautiful horizon - except to say, again, it did not work for me.

Actually I think there is quite a dramatic transition, from wondering what the hell she was doing in the opening monologue to deciding what she had to do on that final page.

Really? What I saw was a desperate act to save her friend who was in trouble again. Sort of a repeat of an old story. The characters didn't change. And she had same challenge again - fight with the girls to save the day - just as she does in the beginning.

The only change I saw was that Buffy realized that her enemy wasn't a demon but the men and women who were afraid of her and believed she'd destroy them when she was finished slaying demons.

It's a story I've done before numerous times in the X-men and I might add, done better. Much better. So I don't find it all that interesting.

So no, it's not the Buffy I loved. But I freely admit, I liked different Buffy than most people did. After all my favorite seasons were 5-7, not 1-4.

[aycheb.livejournal.com]

Thank you, your reservations about the story are much clearer now. It may well be a comic for people who don’t like comics. I suppose you could say it was written for TV audience and Whedon for his genre-mixing fu may be too attached to the arc format he established in that medium. I think that was a problem with his Serenity movie, a season’s worth of story packed into 2 hours, all highlights and no filler.

Form aside we all have our kinks. S7 is my favourite Buffy season in large part because women and leadership is one of mine. Buffy was commandeered into leadership in S7 and although she started out showing some promise soon got bogged down by the flaws in her approach and in the end was mostly successful by reverting to doing things for herself and inspiring rather than actively leading. Here things start with her appearing to be in much the same place but gradually we see otherwise, that she really has matured as a leader, is connecting with her followers and fighting with them not alongside them. With tactics and everything and without losing her soul or her friends in the process.

I loved the ending for moving on to question the ‘where’ rather than the ‘how’ of her leadership and forcing a genuinely questionable decision. Even I know enough about comics to be aware of the old man vs. superman trope but in this context the stakes look higher. Human vs. demon where demons can be metaphors for genuine evil rather than teenage alienation makes the human side for once truly sympathetic. Against that you have the long-standing demonisation of strong women that underpins the Slayer’s argument, it’s not a straightforward choice.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

It may well be a comic for people who don’t like comics. I suppose you could say it was written for TV audience and Whedon for his genre-mixing fu may be too attached to the arc format he established in that medium.

Possible. Hadn't really considered that. Doesn't feel like it to me at this stage, but again, I've only read four issues so it is more than possible that he is doing that. I still think that this a story complete in of itself. Meant to establish a theme, which will be covered in different ways in each arc or issue. What appears to be the main focus of these books is not the characters so much as the theme. It's theme driven as opposed to character driven. That doesn't mean he's not developing the characters. What it means is he is most interested in the overall theme, the characters to him are secondary. The theme is the most important thing. So what I think is going to happen is each arc is meant to explore that theme in greater depth. He probably has told each writer - that he doesn't really care what they do, as long as this theme is adhered to and these characters arrive at this place in support of it. I could be wrong about that - but it is my guess. The tv series up until possibly the Seventh Season - wasn't as *thematic* based, it was more interested in the characters emotional journeys. It's not what I care about, but I'm not writing it - Whedon is. And he should write what he cares about, anything else would be well silly.

I think that was a problem with his Serenity movie, a season’s worth of story packed into 2 hours, all highlights and no filler.

I actually liked Serenity. But it is also message or theme heavy in character. Something shifted in Whedon's writing after Season 6 of Buffy, he became very focused on theme. Prior to that he seemed more interested in the psychological and emotional journeys of his characters. Now, he seems focused on delivering a specific message. Could just be me. But I've noticed a definite shift. Even in the AXM comics I've been reading, which are also very political and thematic in character.

Form aside we all have our kinks. S7 is my favourite Buffy season in large part because women and leadership is one of mine.

I honestly think that's the crux of it. What is our individual kinks or buttons? For example half my flist loves the show Supernatural, which I find myself railing at - why? It hits their kinks while in contrast it hits my buttons. And it's not that their kinks are necessarily my buttons, they aren't. We may even share the same ones. It's just well to what extent can we ignore the buttons to enjoy it? Another example: Buffy - I am not found of high school politics or shows about high school.
But I managed to ignore it for both Buffy and Veronica Mars, because I loved everything else. I watched it in spite of that. While other fans loved the high school and disliked the supernatural bits.

I'm not a huge fan of military shows, war dramas, or dramas dealing with military leadership. The part of season 7 that grated on my nerves was Buffy and the multiple slayers. Buffy bossing the slayers. The whole army bit. Showtime, Bring it On, Get it Done, Dirty Girls, End of Days and Chosen weren't my favorite episodes in the story. I prefered the more psychological ones such as LMPTM (which lots of people online despised because it hit buttons), Beneath You, SelfLess, Sleeper, Never Leave Me, Him. So I watched the show in spite of the whole big leadership bit - it wasn't enough of problem to make me stop watching. I've struggled with Dorothy Dunnett and George RR Martin's books for the same reasons - I find battle sequences dull - it doesn't do anything for me.

That said, I did enjoy Buffy's struggle with figuring out how to lead a group of people and not be the solo act. So in S7 was able to overlook the military bits and all those slayers. I enjoyed her emotional arc from "I have to do this alone" or the "slayer is always alone" to well becoming the chief or leader of a team of demon fighters/slayers. A theme that was also addressed in Restless, to better effect in my opinion.