User Profile

I'm sure this is about to become my least popular opinion.

Ok, yes, it's a classic. It's legendary, and I get why. But I'll be honest... Frank Miller's particular brand of cynicism has never worked for me, and I don't think it works well for Batman. Despite his infamous dark brooding, for Batman to make any sense at all, he's got to have at least a little bit of hope that what he's doing will bear itself out; that he's not fighting an endless battle for no reason. And while you get a bit of that Batman here and there, what you see more often is just [b:Watchmen|472331|Watchmen|Alan Moore|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1442239711l/472331.SY75.jpg|4358649] but with disrespected DC mainline characters (and speaking of DC characters, the less said about Miller's Superman the better). It's either a lack of understanding or intentional disrespect for the character.

So what's good about it? Commissioner Gordon. Carrie Kelley. Alfred Pennyworth. Ellen Yindel. As characters, they're interesting, compelling, flawed, uniquely well-written. The story was an interesting concept, too; its attempt to explore an older Batman, trace the edges of his motivations and limits...good idea. The last few pages were great. And Varley's coloring was tops; especially the contrast intentionally drawn between the more garish and more subdued frames. Excellent craft. All of this could've carried any comic book to greatness.

So what's bad about it?

-Batman, for one. Is he insane and obsessive or not? The book wants us to be unsure about his motivation, but if you're unsure the story's ending doesn't work. It's playing around disrespectfully with a character who would've fit perfectly into this story without the meddling.

-The villains. While the mutants are good, the classic Batman villains who show back up are underused. Pick one: trust your original villains to carry the plot, or go back to the old classics. Don't try to have it both ways. And the villain of the final volume...was frankly inscrutable.

-And yeah, Superman was bad. Clearly written by a man with no respect for the character. If this was considered Elseworlds I could accept it, but I don't see any indication this was intended to be anything but the canon universe Kal-El.

-Janson's inking. Muddy, hard to follow, especially at the start. Is that Bruce Wayne or some other random old dude? I can't tell because he's tiny and way back in the frame. Am I supposed to care about this kid? Yes? No? Oh, no, Batman is kicking babies! No wait, they're...robots? And in a close up that's very clear? If it reinforced the themes it would be understandable, but I don't see any indication that it was intentional at all. I so glad this art style fell out of fashion 30 years ago.

-The incessant cutting back and forth. If this were a film, it would feature five minute long scenes where the shot changed between three different locations every two seconds. It was exhausting and mostly unnecessary. Dozens of pages had identical, overstuffed layouts of tiny little boxes.

As I wrote the review, my opinion of the book continued to fall. I like Batman, but this seems like the Batman that every neckbeard who thinks he's edgy because he loves Batman wants to be like (even though the Sons of the Batman are obviously digs at that particular fan).

Its weakness is in its squandered potential, frankly; and its incessant hype, and the way that Alan Moore did it better. But mostly in the way it could've been good, if only Miller had given the lead some respect.

Fun enough, I suppose; but while I usually LOVE alternate universe/what-if/elseworlds stories, this one seemed to fly a bit less high than "Red Son," for example.

I think part of what I was missing was more hijinks that could only have occurred in a Victorian Gotham. A lot of this story felt like it could easily have taken place in a modern equivalent of this story with no substantial changes. Jack the Ripper was really just a name and could easily have been replaced with some other murderer Batman needed to track down. Even the art wasn't really notably distinct from a modern version of the character; the animated film did a much better job with making the Batman costume almost steampunk, for instance.

The second story in this collection, "Master of the Future," was better in this regard, with a few features that were almost Jules Verne in their look and feel, and a story that was a bit more dependent upon the conceit. Unfortunately that story was hamstrung by an opaque villain.

The other stories were ok. Being parts of long-running arcs that I haven't read, they were pretty confusing, but the Shazam story in particular was pretty fun to get into.

As far as the main attraction here goes, though, I felt like it needed more of what it was promising.

One of the most heartfelt Superman stories ever written, this is the Man of Tomorrow through all his yesterdays; as seen through the eyes of his family, his loves, and his most storied enemy. With expressive art that may as well be feelings rendered in ink, a villain that hits him where it hurts, and a story that explores Clark's inner demons without ever demonizing him, this is everything the Superman movies of the 2000s have forgotten about the Last Son of Krypton.

Y'all, this book is WORTH READING in a really fun way. Poignant without being preachy, thoughtful but action-packed, and incredibly fun while still adding some depth to the Superman mythos.

All of that adds up to maybe the best Superman story I've ever read. Tightly-woven, true to Superman's character, and the first graphic novel I've wanted to own since Red Son in 2003. Read this book.

Cute, snappy YA fare with quite a bit more wit than it deserves to have. It surprised me at several turns, and while the story is a bit thin and the end comes too quickly, I'm hopeful that the full series read together will complete a fuller story. This is better than the Netflix movie adaptation, and I found that film quite delightful.

A slow and somewhat confusing build at the start breaks into a sprint that runs off the last page without giving even a chance at a breath. A fun and snappy read, overall, with twists and turns and generally lovable characters throughout. Rielle and Eliana are compelling as dual protagonists, though it almost seems like Legrand was discovering their personalities as we were and, with a couple of exceptions, are pretty similar (though for an understandable reason). The central conceit of the story structure is certainly fresh, and many of the side characters work their way into your heart. It's a great start to a series.

Too many questions, not enough answers. Good, complex story, though, with good, complex characters. Unfortunately also a lot of head scratchers, and the "tortured superhero" — well, maybe it wasn't a trope in 2008, but it kinda is now.

The art is excellent, though, and the concept is gripping. If this fall's movie draws from this well, it'll be quite interesting.

"Have you considered what is true of you if you are in Christ? In order for you to fall short of loving embrace into the heart of Christ both now and into eternity, Christ himself would have to be pulled down out of heaven and put back in the grave."

One of the most compelling and thoughtful looks at the heart of Jesus for humans I've ever read. A balm and salve for those wounded by a toxic Christianity with an impersonal God; a repudiation and table-flipping for those who contend that Christ is merely a warrior or a barrel-chested stoic. This book feels like taking the first breath of warm, fragrant spring air after a winter spent indoors.

Cute kids' chapter book. Probably a little over the head of a 6-year-old, but he really enjoyed it.

A truly remarkable tale, told without exaggeration or obfuscation; of a bold trip undertaken by exceptional humans, the catastrophe that left them cut off from both their original mission and all civilization, and their unfailing determination to return home through trackless void, beset by increasingly ludicrous obstacles.

The book reads like "The Martian," but it really happened. Or like "Apollo 13," but it was undertaken by men who lived sixty years prior, and made the trek without the benefit of mission control.

They conquered the Antarctic ice pack. They conquered the Drake Passage. And they conquered South Georgia Island. This story is gripping and fascinating, and anyone interested in the age of exploration or disaster stories should read it.

Way more compelling sci-fi transhuman ideas to explore than the first, but a bit less gripping.

The first half of this one was a bit too slow and the last half way too fast, the romantic subplot resolution felt contrived, and a decent amount of character growth from the first book seems to have reverted itself by the beginning of the second, and there were several moments where I had absolutely no idea what was going on.

But the ideas brought up in this one are fascinating to think about; ideas about the nature of consciousness, the responsibility of the human race to itself, what makes us good and evil, and the dangers of hero worship, just to name a few.

Plus, the action was more deliberately cinematic in this version, with plenty of vivid word pictures and thoughtful exuberance. Victories feel earned, denouements feel narratively consistent, and characters have a really admirable amount of agency throughout.

It's all fascinating stuff, presented pretty enjoyably.