BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Swamp Thing #5

 
 
The Photographer in Blowup
10:00 / 01.07.04
The first four pages of #5 can be found here:

If by page one you're not convinced DC's mature imprint has finally hit bottom, you will be by page 4.

Tefe turns into a dragon-like creature and fights a giant Swamp Thing, and now only Human Target and Seaguy can save Vertigo from becoming pure drivel.
 
 
_Boboss
10:11 / 01.07.04
yurs that is very embarassing. diggle is surely the very worst thing to happen to comics for a while now, classic uncool comic type guy failing to emulate his heroes. as i believe the hawk said recently, he's like abnett and lanning, without, it must be said, lanning's flair for the inx
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
16:10 / 01.07.04
Oh my fucking eyes... page four gives a capsule reason for why Swamp Thing should have finished forever at the end of Millar's run and I suspect that Diggle's great idea for any future this comic might have is to depower Swampy again. Suck suck suck suck suck.
 
 
Murray Hamhandler
19:08 / 01.07.04
Ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...what?

I've read everything Swamp Thing up to right before the beginning of this series and I can't think of any logical reason for Tefe to become a dragon. What the fucking fuck...

I liked Diggle's Lady Constantine, but this shit is really sub-par.
 
 
eddie thirteen
20:07 / 01.07.04
Wow. Hey, look, how do you get a job writing comics now? I mean, seriously. I'm not trying to turn this into haterfest or something, but I'm dying to know. I'm forever hearing how hard it is to break into industry, which would lead one to believe the difficulty has something to do with exacting editorial standards, right? Uh...well, THAT obviously isn't it, so....?
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
20:34 / 01.07.04
To get a job writing Vertigo comics you tend to spend several years writing for 2000AD.
 
 
eddie thirteen
20:36 / 01.07.04
Dammit! I knew I should have been British...I'd have the cool accent and everything...bah!
 
 
Spatula Clarke
00:39 / 02.07.04
Since when was the Swamp Thing related to Ming the Merciless?
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
09:56 / 02.07.04
Thank you- you've just made my week. The other day I was comic shopping and thought "hmm... wonder if the new Swamp Thing run's any good?" and was all set to buy them but couldn't find #1, which has been pissing me off ever since.
I now realise what a wonderul escape I had.

This is so poo/.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
10:30 / 02.07.04
I find it very odd that Andy Diggle's other work for Vertigo and DC in general seems so sup-bar, when The Losers is so good (up there with Y and Human Target as far as I'm concerned). The only explanation I can think of is that he feels a lot of loyalty/gratitude to the company for putting out a creator-owned ongoing series (which I suspect is very much his priority, and the different standard of writing confirms as much), and so in return is happy to do hackwork on the franchises they want reviving...
 
 
lord nuneaton savage
10:58 / 02.07.04
Y'know I've never read a swampthing comic in my life and I'm probably not one to criticise, but that is fucking terrible.

"ENOUGH!"

titter, titter...
 
 
_Boboss
11:10 / 02.07.04
never read a swamp thing comic in my life

really?

dude
 
 
Sax
11:24 / 02.07.04
The best thing about that is the "mature" advisory.
 
 
Murray Hamhandler
21:07 / 02.07.04
Threadrot: Fly, I'm pretty sure that Losers is based on an old & relatively obscure DC property and, therefore, not creator-owned. Which would mean that Diggles's just wildly inconsistent w/o rhyme or reason.
 
 
yawn - thing's buddy
11:19 / 03.07.04
diggle drips at the thought of writing constantine or swampy. he luvs it.

but I hate it.

he's shite. Formulaic. He thinks he's got a battle plan.

He's the Victor of comics writing.
 
 
Haus of Mystery
17:56 / 03.07.04
I think I'll stick with Godzilla for my giant beasty fun. I guess that it's, like, rilly symbolic and meaningful that Swampy and Tefe are about to kick the shite out of each other EVEN THOUGH they're blood. Sniff. Like, that story is rilly going to resonate...
 
 
Bed Head
22:39 / 03.07.04
To get a job writing Vertigo comics you tend to spend several years writing for 2000AD.

Er, I think Diggle first got to write for 2000AD because he was editing the damn thing at the time. And making a particularly shit job of it, at that. But I’m still pretty sure the time he spent as the all-wise and beneficent Tharg is linked, in some mysterious way, to the flowering of his career as one of the great writing talents of Britcomics.

The guy’s got his own forum somewhere, hasn’t he? I think it’s linked to the Nick Locking wankfest somehow. Just for next time you’re bored and in search of a place to troll.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
11:16 / 04.07.04
Threadrot: Fly, I'm pretty sure that Losers is based on an old & relatively obscure DC property and, therefore, not creator-owned. Which would mean that Diggles's just wildly inconsistent w/o rhyme or reason.

Oops. You're not wrong. Still, I think I'm right in saying that it's a revival in title only: all the characters are Diggle's, as is the anti-CIA slant.
 
 
Haus of Mystery
11:37 / 04.07.04
It's the fucking A-Team though is it not?
 
 
The Photographer in Blowup
12:00 / 04.07.04
From an interview:

Diggle acknowledges that "The Losers" started out as an old World War II comic book, he was never an avid reader of the original series and so this isn't a big nostalgia trip for him. In fact, the one idea he did conceive of that would have most played off the old continuity was dismissed before the final scripts were created and instead, an entirely new story had to be conceived. "I was writing 'Lady Constantine' for Will Dennis at Vertigo when we started chatting about what I might work on next. I'd already pitched him a couple of my own ideas, but I wasn't a big enough 'name' to get creator-owned work commissioned. We really wanted to do a heist story, so we started casting around for some old forgotten DC crime characters to revamp into a new company-owned mini-series. It was Will who suggested this old World War II comic called 'The Losers.' He figured, what if these guys got together after the war to pull a heist?

"I'd never heard of 'The Losers,' but I instantly loved the title, and a storyline downloaded itself into my brain almost immediately. We'd start off in the closing days of World War II, with the original Losers smuggling Nazi rocket scientists out of Europe. Then we jump forward to the mid-50s, where the Losers are now jaded veterans, embittered by the fact that, rather than being brought to justice, these ex-Nazis are being paid to work on the American rocket program... at the American taxpayers' expense. Then the Losers get wind of a shipment of gold, which was destined to fund a secret Nazi weapons program. It's still hidden somewhere in central Europe, just waiting to be found. But before they can get their hands on it, they're going to have to kidnap these German scientists from Los Alamos...

"The new version was set in the present day, a four-issue mini-series about a bunch of former soldiers who absconded with a shipment of Al Quaeda gold they looted from a cave in Tora Bora, and who were now setting their sights on heisting an American oil company which was up to no good. That was it. At least, that's how it started..."


... then DC liked it so much they greenlighted it as an ongoing.

I don't have any particular hatred for Andy Diggle; I do hate his writing, but respect whoever enjoys reading The Losers every month.

But he created a completely new set of DCU reference-free characters involved in a completely new situation and premise, the only thing in common is a title which could have been changed in a heartbeat, and he let DC own his original creations? This is not a very intelligent move, to me. The point of Vertigo is that the creator owns his original work.

Intelligent would have been to write that four-issue mini with the original Losers set in the '50's, become a household name on the account of that mini and Lady Constantine's success, then go to DC and say "look, I have this original idea I came up with about a group of CIA agents betrayed by their own agency; it's a heist/caper series, it's a successful genre at the moment, I'm now famous in America, it'll be a hit. Will you publish this creator-owned series?" And DC would without thinking twice.

I wonder if he's lost royalty privileges... like I said, I hate his writing, but I think it's horrible when a creator doesn't get what he's entitled to...
 
 
DaveBCooper
10:15 / 05.07.04
This thread seems a bit oddly personalised to my mind; Andy Diggle’s a perfectly competent writer, and whilst it may or may not have been wise to have given The Losers over to DC, it may just have been a loss-leader to get a foot in the door so he can write other things, which is what appears to be happening for him.

And the idea of Vertigo is that DC can publish comics for an older age range, not that the creators own the characters etc. Be nice if DC had specifically set it up for that reason, but as it started from the foundation of titles like Shade, Hellblazer, Sandman, Animal Man and Doom Patrol, I’d have to take issue with the idea that creator rights were the reason for its existence. Given it’s owned ultimately by Time Warner, I think that we can gue$$ what the reason for its existence is…

Andy Diggle did indeed start out editing 2000AD, where he threw down the writing gauntlet to would-be writers with the story Lenny Zero, which he said was an example of what he wanted to see in submissions to 2000AD. The story was pretty good, with various twists and turns and action in a limited number of pages, which sounds exactly like what you’re after in a 2000AD-style short. And if memory serves, he waived the writer’s fee for it, putting it back into the pot for use elsewhere in 2000AD or the Dredd Megazine.

As one who occasionally scribbles for comics, I’ll freely admit that I’m vaguely envious of his rise within a short time, but it’s not as if it’s done without talent – the Losers is pretty good fun – and the man is clearly doing the work. In that interview excerpt, he talks about the pitch he originally made for The Losers, and he must have done similar pitches for Swamp Thing and Lady Constantine, and for his forthcoming work, as well as sitting down and writing the damn things, which, a lot of the time, is something I don’t get round to doing, so I can’t translate that envy into the kind of dislike which people appear to be exhibiting here.

I’ve met him once, and he’s a decent chap, and his forum’s perfectly harmless, and the idea of trolling it just because you don’t like his writing is a bit uninspired, really; why not spend that time writing/drawing decent comics instead ?
If you feel that strongly about bad stuff in the medium, that is.
 
 
_Boboss
10:37 / 05.07.04
a storyline downloaded itself into my brain almost immediately

should read

an abandoned Garth Ennis storyline downloaded itself into my brain almost immediately
 
 
Ray Fawkes
14:33 / 05.07.04
I'm with you, Mr. Cooper - this sounds like a lot of griping from the collected couches of Barbelith. "The Losers" has clearly found an audience that appreciates it. Why the bitterness here? If someone doesn't like Mr. Diggle's "Swamp Thing" stories, they don't have to buy them.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
16:24 / 05.07.04
So, if we don't like it, we don't have to buy it?

Gosh. I was wondering if the ken of man was ever going to come up with a weaker argument than "if you haven't created a television show as successful as Babylon 5, don't you *dare* criticise Jim Michael StraJimski!" I should have had faith. Took about a week.
 
 
Ray Fawkes
18:37 / 05.07.04
Really? It's weak? See, 'cause you didn't actually refute it there.

If you're buying Mr. Diggle's books and you don't like them, the easiest way to make your views felt (at the publisher, at least) is to refrain from purchasing any more - just as the easiest way to show support is to continue purchasing them.

Of course, if you're not actually buying his books, you really don't have a right to complain at all. You've lost nothing, there are others who enjoy them, and there's a whole world of alternate choices out there for you to buy.
 
 
eddie thirteen
20:17 / 05.07.04
Oh, Jesus. Listen, I'm sure Andy Diggle will somehow survive someone on a message board saying that a comic he wrote sorta sucks. I was actually surprised at how laughably crappy this sliver of comic book looks, because -- while I haven't read Losers -- everything I have heard about it has been positive; as to Andy Diggle himself, I know he's on a mailing list that a friend of mine runs, and everything I've heard from that camp has been positive, too...i.e., he seems to be a nice guy. I don't know from personal experience either way, but I expect that he probably really is a cool person.

Nevertheless, this looks pretty silly. It isn't an affront to humanity or anything, but it definitely does not display a whole lot of promise. I'm not really sure where you get off questioning someone's right to point out the (totally subjective, though most of us here do seem to be in agreement) obvious. On the other hand, the thread abstract is a bit vitriolic -- though this looks like instant quarter bin fodder, it hardly represents a new low for Vertigo, which has always published junk alongside its better titles...and for that matter, a lot of that junk was published under the title Swamp Thing.

Oh...and with The Losers thing, I don't know, but I would imagine that Andy Diggle and the artist own the rights to the characters and to their own work, but not to the title of the comic itself (that is to say, that they could take the book to another publisher and reprint it under a different title). I'm pretty sure that was the arrangement Seagle and Kristiansen had when they were doing Vertigo's House of Secrets.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
20:34 / 05.07.04
So, October Ghost, does that mean you promise never to criticise anything ever again? Including my statements? Because you have the option of not reading them?

Excellent.

Back in grown-up school, criticism is often seen as a valid way for artists to discover what is and is not working about their art, and also for people to discuss a work and decide what is and is not good about it, for a number of reasons. Let us say, for example, that I really like Babylon 5. I say to somebody else, "I really like Babylon 5. I believe Jim Michael StraJimski is a genius."

Somebody else says to me. "I don't know. I find his dialogue a bit stilted."

Now, do I at this point go "LALALALALALLAA! I CAN'T HEAR YOU! LALALALALA! IF YOU DON'T LIKE BABYLON 5 YOU DON'T HAVE TO WATCH IT! LALALALA?"

I do not, because I am a grown-up in grown-up school. And who knows, perhaps the next thing they say is "Why not try Ray Fawkes' Spookshow? It's really good. I think you will like it. Copies are available in many fine independent bookstores." Perhaps it is. Perhaps. Do you see what happened there?

So, back to business. If you sincerely believe that one is not allowed to comment on a book one has not purchased, because one has not purchased it, and that one is not allowed to comment on a book one has purchased, because one has the option of ceasing to purchase it, then cheerio. Ceasing to buy may be the easiest way to express an opinion of a work, but it would make the London Review of Books a fucking dull read.

"I have just stopped buying 'Poetry Review'."

"I have just purchased a book of poems by Don Paterson. If I do not enjoy it, I might not purchase the next one."


There is a world of textual response beyond handing over dollars for paper. I would be happier if more, rather than fewer, comic book readers believed this, but YMMV.

Now. There appears to be a feeling in this thread among some people that Andy Diggle's work on Swamp Thing is below par. They may wish to share this belief because they believe that another writer would do a better job. They may be irritated by what they perceive as the etiolation of the Vertigo brand. They may simply be annoyed that somebody they believe to be of limited ability is writing regular comic books published by a major imprint. People complain about Chuck Austen in these terms all the time - there is a thread for it right now. Would you like to pop over and tell them off, or is it only the writers of tales about unconventional CIA agents who might want to hang out with you and discuss cool CIA shit who get the Octobriensis Umbra Umbrella?

What I just did there was suggest that you are motivated by an ignoble desire to be Andy Diggle's best friend. Many people impute emotions to those who disagree with their taste, in order to imply that they are being unreasonable. In this case, "bitterness". It is an annoying habit of a less able critic. However, others who do it on occasion also add some comments of value. So far you have discussed people's discussion of Andy Diggle and nothing of the work of Andy Diggle himself. You obviously have no wish to do so - after all, you either buy or do not buy his comics, which is all the critical response you could ever wish to give. As such, kindly do not rot this thread.
 
 
Ray Fawkes
21:01 / 05.07.04
Holy Christ, Haus. Point taken. "Grown-up school" is all yours. You rule.
 
 
■
22:36 / 05.07.04
I think the criticism is less about Diggle than about why the hell DC resurrected Swampy. It should have finished with Alan Moore's run. Rick Veitch did a passable ob for a while and then it all went to hell. Millar gave it a cracking respectful send-off and it should have stayed dead forever. It wasn't an 'event' death: it just made sense that it had all gone too far and should be stopped.
The sort of crap that those pages above exemplify is inexcusable. It's just "my dad's bigger than your dad" one-upmanship with pretty paintings, foliage and claws. It would be awful even if Bissette and Totleben were still on board.
The biggest reason Diggle should be told off for this is that he should have had enough sense to leave well alone.
 
 
■
22:40 / 05.07.04
and god Haus, I know you're a mod and all and you're nearly always spot on, but could you give people the benefit of the doubt once in a while?
There are small people who want to live here, too.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
05:37 / 06.07.04
I don't think my being a mod matters here, particularly - I mean, moderators don't really have the power to compel people to behave in any particular way, as long as they are not trolling (although I would very strongly advise people not to troll other people's fora, especially not en masse - it's not very nice and we wouldn't want to be trolled back when the board reopens). I was expressing, as a private indivdual, distaste that (small) people were being told that their opinions were a) the product of bitterness rather than any aesthetic sense and b) utterly without value. Your victim may vary, however.
 
  
Add Your Reply