Comic Book Journal

I saw this adaptation of Sherilyn Kenyon’s Lords of Avalon and admittedly, I was intrigued. Marvel has stepped outside of its comfort level of mutants to a realm of magic before with great success. The Anita Blake adaptations were very well written, and hopefully, Marvel will aquire the rights to a series and not just a limited run. But enough about that solid series for now. Attempting to branch out to different markets, like with Anita Blake: Vampire Hunter, Marvel has released, a Sherrilyn Kenyon companion, Lords of Avalon. While the story centers on deceit in the kingdom of Avalon and the assassin who is tapped to find out who is torturing and murdering knights of the holy grail, the subplot is the battle between good and evil inside the soul of Varian. Now let’s talk story–the plot is solid, but I imagine, not as well crafted as one of Kenyon’s novels, still the shortened adaptation does have it’s appeal as it jumps straight into the situation at hand, only transitioning to flashback when necessary to explain a character’s motivation or situation. The artwork had to grow on me as the story progressed. I’m usually not a huge fan of the manga-inspired style, but it did seem to work with this story adding a shade of drama to what might have been a very straightfoward, watered-down set of storyboards. All in all I would have to say this series is worth checking out, and for fans of fantasy, maybe even the World of Warcraft crowd, it will be a hit. I’d give this one a solid six out of ten. For more on ABVH: Guilty Pleasures, see my reviews at :http://www.comicbookjournal.net/category/marvel/

This makes Superman Returns look like Citizen Kane!

I went to go see the Spirit on Christmas day. I was in a rather cheerful mood, because not only was it Christmas, but I got to spend the day at my leisure as I finally got the day off. My cheerfulness ended there, however. Cheer was replaced with anger as I exited the theatre disappointed and outraged. Yes, I will repeat genuine outrage. Frank Miller can hold his own in the comics industry, and Eisner as we all know is a legend and has created a remarkable character in the Spirit, so what happened? From the beginning the movie did not even attempt to acknowledge the audience. No effort was made to establish any sort of plot. The visuals, while interesting did nothing to revive the lackluster story. No wait– there was no story. The origin story of Denny Colt becoming the Spirit was the only saving grace, but therein lies the problem, there was not anything to get me involved in the film. And don’t get me started on the appeal to the highbrow class of movie-goer, who would attempt to draw meaning on the various imagery throughout the film. If someone was deciphered the meaning behind the ethos, pathos, logos clones, or the significance of the blood of Heracles, please…get back to me because I don’t get it. I don’t think I want to. This film could have been legendary like its creator, but as the director has said, he did not make this film for the fans. If Miller had focused on the fans, we might have had a fitting tribute to a man who devoted most of his life to this industry, instead of an over-the-top, look-at-me ego trip which is nothing more than a waste of film. I give this flick a two out of ten. The actor playing the Spirit was good in a few scenes, but that’s about it. For more reviews of (hopefully) better movies check out http://www.moviereviewreport.com/