2000AD 2011
Reviewed by Martin Skidmore 20-Dec-10
The 2000AD Xmas special proves to be not so much special as, by and large, a fatter regular issue.
I’ve never been a regular 2000AD reader – here and there, or I’d buy it for a while when something I desperately wanted was in there, then drift away again. I don’t suppose I’ve ever bought say 20 in a row. But I’ve been mostly enjoying the Judge Dredd Case Files collections, and I bought a couple of issues recently to read my pal Al Ewing’s Dredd strip with the wonderful Brendan McCarthy, which I enjoyed enormously. Another Al Ewing Dredd strip made me give this Xmas special a go.
Al gives us the Chief Judge’s traditional Christmas speech, and we listen to him as we watch Dredd at work on a sequence of crimes and criminals. Paul Marshall’s art is rather Ron Smith in how he draws faces, but despite that he gives us a series of potent images of Dredd – the first shot is particularly threatening, partly because of some cheating on the colouring. This strip would make a great intro to the character, and is a perfect lead for this special.
Whereas I could make little sense of the second strip – it feels very like a key moment in a longer story, about some super-alien taking over the universe or some such. I thought the alien was called Shakira for a moment, but it turns out to be Shakara. Anyway, the writing by Robbie “let’s just put the surname on the cover” Morrison is vaguely intriguing and seems to have large-scale scifi ambition, which is comparatively rare in 2000AD‘s history, but the star is artist Henry Flint, who gives us spectacular images, powerful B&W imagery (Shakara is the only one who gets an extra colour, blue) and a sense of excitement.
Slaine is part of a continuing story that I’d seen in those two other recent issues, but at least we get the climax here. The silly story, about the Celts’ practice of what Pat Mills calls murderball, playing games with human heads, is a poor fit with the obsessively lunatic art by Clint Langley, obviously built from photos and heavy processing, which is very irritating.
Rogue Trooper, STILL by Gerry Finley-Day, attempts to sum up and introduce a character who always bored me, and Staz Johnson’s art is functional in a cheap-artist-from-Spain-decades-ago kind of way.
The Ian Edginton/Simon Davis Ampney Crucis strip is merely the start of a story, which again annoys: it looks set to be fun, as Edginton reliably proves to be, except Simon Davis’s preference for indicating any darkness or shadow by painting every face blue is hugely distracting.
I had hoped an Alan Grant Judge Anderson strip in a special might be good, but it feels like a fill-in riffing on very old and dull ideas about the character, and artist Patrick Goddard could hardly be more forgettable, in a harmless way.
Whereas Necrophim is absolutely dreadful. Writer Tony Lee is trying to lever a novel’s worth of material in here, and sadly rather than giving us the action (bar the odd stiff-as-a-board confrontation) he opts for throwing name after name after name at us, with the odd place name or two added. This isn’t helped by artist Lee Carter, who gives us everything in grey and makes everyone and everywhere look pretty similar. Add in the fact that the hordes of demons turning on Lucifer think the battle could be decided by their invention of what seem to be flintlock pistols, which makes the demons seem pretty lame, and this is by far the worst thing in here.
Kingdom is yet another start of a story. There’s not a lot to it, but it is told with craft and control by Dan Abnett and Richard Elson, and I am a sucker for good rain art.
I realise specials are hardly made for readers like me, those who don’t buy every prog, but so many parts of continuing stories surely doesn’t seem special to anyone. Having said that, writers as hugely entertaining and inventive as Al Ewing and Ian Edginton, plus maybe Robbie Morrison and Dan Abnett (I can’t entirely tell from this), plus still-often-interesting vets like Mills (though I had enough of Slaine a very long time ago) and Grant suggest that that side of 2000AD is still very strong. I wish the art looked as good: Henry Flint is the only one who impressed me a lot, and Elson and Marshall the only others I’d be at least on balance positive about – Davis could be added, if he can be weaned off those blue faces. This is less appealing, and all in all two issues and a not-very-special haven’t hooked me – but I would be interested to hear opinions on Shakara, which has surely appeared before, and Robbie Morrison, as I am tempted to buy for Flint’s art.
Tags: 2000AD, Al Ewing, Henry Flint, Paul Marshall, Robbie Morrison
which reminds me that I have still to write my piece on spending a month reading contemporary 2000AD.
“I realise specials are hardly made for readers like me, those who don’t buy every prog, but so many parts of continuing stories surely doesn’t seem special to anyone.”
I suppose that depends on your expectations. Although arriving at the end of the year these specials (from Prog 2000 when these started) are not designed to be self-contained but are really extended issues of the comic, presumably to give Tharg and his droids time off over Xmas. As such this isn’t supposed to stand apart from the run of issues, so the previous issue was #1714 and the ongoing stories continue in #1715.
It is designed as a jumping-on point where all the new ongoing stories start in one issue with other one-offs (I have no idea what the last episode of Slaine is doing in this although I assume there was some lateness so it was shifted back a week, so it should have ended in the previous issue), so the continuing stories are the point not a minus. Although, as I say, it depends on your expectations, but it sounds like you were expecting a completely different comic to the one you got.
I don’t quite understand this review.
It seems to be complaining that the stories are mostly beginning here, but at the same time bemoans it is not for those who don’t buy every prog?
Oh, and Gerry FD is not “still” on Rogue Trooper, as you’d know if you’d read the intrduction, it’s a one-off special…
My problem was that I thought a Xmas special would be a bunch of one-off stories, something that would work better in isolation than this does. This may be 2000AD’s usual practice, but it’s not what I expected.
Perhaps you could have stated that more clearly in your review Martin.
You could also have addressed the reasons as to why your expectations differed from what is standard practice for the prog.
What an astounding review – the appreciation of the writing seems to be based on predispositions to the authors (your ‘pal’ Al, an obvious familiarity with Edginton)whereas others get some weird dismissal – still no idea what you were intending with that Robbie Morrison line.
The GFD error is so embarrassingly cringe-worthy (strips creator returns after 20 years hiatus) you really should be apologising and amending your error. Man up.
2011 is a great jump on point for a comic that is widely acknowledged to be in a second golden era. Every anthology will have 1 or 2 stories per year ‘you’ don’t like / get but compared to what else is out there 2000AD is so far ahead of the competition its embarrassing. Much like your review.
The Robbie Morrison line is based on a few American comics with him writing where they just put ‘Morrison’ on the cover.
Yes, I clearly screwed up re Rogue Trooper. Amending it would hardly be manning up, as that would be hiding my mistake.
What an utterly shameful excuse for a piece of shoddy journalism, which reflects badly on not only the author, but whatever editorial team decided it was fit for publication.
1) “The Robbie Morrison line is based on a few American comics…” So, an entirely unsubstantiated claim that, even if true, has no relevance here since Robbie’s name isn’t ON the cover?
2) “Amending it […] would be hiding my mistake.” Balls, Martin, and you know it. You make the amendment and add an editorial note in parentheses acknowledging the correction. If you’re going to play ignorant of that convention, then you’ve no business writing for any kind of publication.
3) “This may be 2000AD’s usual practice, but it’s not what I expected.” Well, they’ve only been doing it for a decade, Martin. The briefest, most cursory bit of Googling as background research would have told you this, as would the ten seconds it would have taken you to ask someone who DID read the comic.
So, in summary, your review reads:
“Well-known annual ‘jumping on’ issue of 2000AD contains lots of first episodes, which annoyed me because I couldn’t be bothered doing the smallest amount of research. Meanwhile, here’s some gross factual inaccuracy and a minor slur on Robbie Morrison.”
Hang your bloody head in shame, man.
It’s a review, an opinion, not a set of facts about a comic.
1. It was a jokey line. The comic I particularly remember it on was The Authority or some spin-off of that, where very general opinion was that the publishers were hoping readers would think it was Grant, who had written a couple of issues before. It’s not actually a slur of any kind, unless you think sharing a surname with a more established writer is a slur.
2. Well it’s a new one on me – I guess most of my journalistic experience is in print, where obviously different rules apply. I still think letting mistakes stand and facing up to them down here is more honest.
3. The opening of this makes clear my ignorance of their usual practice. I still think it’s at odds with the usual across the rest of the comic industry.
I’m still not clear why a factual mistake and a confessed unfamiliarity with 2000AD’s usual practice makes this a shameful review, though – most of it isn’t about that.
I’m still not clear why a factual mistake and a confessed unfamiliarity with 2000AD’s usual practice makes this a shameful review, though
How about not even being able to correctly identify the company that’s been publishing the title for the last decade?
*shrug*
If you’re happy to have your name on a piece of lazy, third-rate hack-work like this, Martin, that’s your prerogative.
Like you, I was quite excited by Shakara the first time I read it. After five weeks or so, never mind three or four runs, it becomes clear quite how tediously one-note it is. There are some arresting visuals from time to time, but even that reminds me a bit too much of Euro SF like Metabarons, which I take to have been its inspiration and which I always found most unengaging.
Thanks for this – I was hoping someone would comment on Shakara.
“Thanks for this – I was hoping someone would comment on Shakara.”
Beyond your razor-sharp insight that the strip’s title sounded a bit like Shakira, you mean?
You were hoping someone would say something negative about Shakara because your own comments — barring the insinuation that Robbie Morrison trades off the reputation of Grant Morrison — were one of the more positive elements of your review?
FFS, give it up. I asked for comments because I was intrigued and wanted to know if it was worth following up on.
In case anyone else is equally bad at reading, I am not implying Robbie Morrison does anything of the sort – I, along with many others, do think at least one publisher may have had thoughts like that.
Fleetway? Really? Did your Google break?
Give the poor lad a break guys.
The opening 2 page of Mark’s copy featuring:
a) the indicia identifying the publisher
b) Tharg’s introduction explaining:
1) the remit of the End of Year Prog, ie a mixture of one-offs & the opening episodes of new stories making it a zarjaz jumping on point for new & lapsed readers;
2) Gerry Finlay-Day’s return after 2 decades absence;
3) the inclusion of the closing part of Slaine to mark Clint Langley’s final work on the character (FYI Mark, Tharg did the same thing with Millls & O’Neill’s final episode on Nemesis the Warlock in Prog 2000).
c) plot synopses of the continuing stories;
d) Cat Sullivan’s excellent ‘Droid Life’ strip.
were obviously stuck together with jam or Airfix glue.