Windblade comic discussion (starting on page 2)

[Sparky Prime]

Hearing some good reaction to it on TFW and elsewhere. Everywhere in town was sold out, so I had to special order it. Meantime, I picked up vol. 4 of MTMTE, so that should hold me over until next Wednesday when my copy comes in.

I haven't been to the comic book store yet, but I've read some reviews and synopsis posted online as well... Does sound like an interesting book so far and has been pretty well received.

[JediTricks]

Hopefully my shop has it in my pull file, I'm not sure I added it but they often just drop stuff like that in.

[Mako Crab]

https://twitter.com/MairghreadScott/sta ... 8296515585

It came in at #3, right after Walking Dead and My Little Pony. Fuck YEAAAAH!!! IDW is having a good day.

[Dominic]

Windblade #1:
I might be biased against this book because of Scott baiting Furman a few months back. But.....I do not like it.

Scott kicks off her back-matter with the universal greeting, and uses exclamation points non-sarcastically. (That latter is a huge peeve of mine.) The over-all tone makes me think "aimed at 12 year old girls".

Scott frames "Windblade" as being about "a young woman's....", which given the Furman-baiting from a few months back, makes me leery of this book. There is also the question of the back-write to reconcile the female TFs. It is not the first back-write in IDW. ("Dark Cybertron" had a few. And, "Chaos" was predicated on a significant back-write.) But, it is the first one that is specifically done to "fix" something that was not a problem unless somebody was looking to creatively misread something.

There is a moment between Windblade and Chromia that is likely meant to pander to shippers. (Chromia makes a comment about being "just as close in the morning". We can only await the fanfic.)

Scott notes that she is making a play for new readers. And, she thanks people for the early internet buzz. (Remember how that buzz got started?)

Misc notes: Assuming that a Cybertronian day cycle is the same as an Earth day cycle (which in soft sci-fi is not an unreasonable assumption), this book is set ~6 months after "Dark Cybertron". Yeah, it looks like "real-time:page time" ratios are pretty well gone.

Gonna be dropping this one.

Grade: F

[BWprowl]

Replies then review, because I like both this book and arguing with Dom. And rev up those similar-sounding commercials, because it's about to get ad hominem in here!

The over-all tone makes me think "aimed at 12 year old girls".

I fail to understand why this is necessarily a bad thing.

But, it is the first one that is specifically done to "fix" something that was not a problem unless somebody was looking to creatively misread something.

Or if they, you know, wanted to include female characters but were prevented by the current state of the canon from doing so. This is comics, you're allowed to write in retcons as you see fit.

There is a moment between Windblade and Chromia that is likely meant to pander to shippers. (Chromia makes a comment about being "just as close in the morning". We can only await the fanfic.)

Holy dogtits you are the most paranoid person ever. Some reason you're not also bitching about all the panels of Starscream getting uncomfortably close with Windblade? Or the scenes of Tankor and Tankorr hanging out next to each other? Or the pages that have multiple characters on-panel together (CLEARLY pandering to Rattrap/Chromia shippers!). I genuinely do not get how any scenes even remotely implying romantic tension count as 'pandering to shippers'. Are stories simply not allowed to have that anymore? Because that sort of thing has been around before the internet existed, and I don't recall anyone ever complaining that Brutus and Caesar's interactions were 'pandering to shippers'.

Gonna be dropping this one.

Grade: F

Man, that's a pretty harsh review of the back-matter page and some posts the writer made on a forum months ago, but what did you think of the *comic* Dom? You hardly talk about that except to recoil in fear of presumed shippery.
(Sidebar, what's your beef with exclamation points? The tone of the write-up at the back is pretty clearly enthusiastic and conversational, basically a letters page with no letters for it yet, I don't see what the problem is. If exclamation points aren't meant to be used 'non-sarcastically', then what the fuck is the point of a language having them in the first place?)

Anyway, obviously, I thought the book was quite alright. The story's pretty by-the-book so far, almost a reverse-Drift, with a new character coming BACK from a previously-forgotten society to Cybertron, and having her life affected in the process. But it doesn't offend my sensibilities yet, and even had a few amusing bits (gotta love how it took Windblade just one issue to figure out about Starscream what that idiot Metalhawk never managed to catch onto in over a dozen). Chromia's pretty cool too, as a secondary character.

The thing that's *really* drawing me in about this book though, is the art. I seriously cannot overstate how pretty this thing is. The lineart has a great, characteristic look to it (kinda like TFPrime, but with some actual personality to it) and is the only medium thus far that has gotten me to like Windblade's design (I very rarely find myself compelled to want a TF toy specifically because of a piece of media, but this one issue has me looking forward to Windblade's toy based on how much it got her design to grow on me). Then there's the colors. The art-deco approach the the backgrounds, the highlights around the characters, gratuitous red/blue contrast to make everything stand out, and some great artistic flourishes where it counts (the explosion page towards the end of the issue looks goddamn brilliant, and the muted colors on the next 'coming back online' page ain't bad either). Seriously you guys, I could probably gush about how good this thing looks forever. I would seriously not mind having a version of this issue that didn't have any of the word balloons over it. I need to look up more of this Sarah Stone gal's art when I have the chance, I hope she sticks with TF for a long time.

There are a few minor niggles, besides the thus-far pedestrian-yet-inoffensive story. IDW's definitely sliding headlong into a generic Aligned-style continuity with this series instead of staying hard-G1, with things like Octane-now-called-Tankor hanging out with a series-displaced BM Tankor (why they didn't codify them as Tankor and Tankorr is beyond me), and Slag now called Slug with no explanation (at least they tried previously, with Trailcutter). So whatever, that battle's pretty much lost (at least the 'Windblade' series has the decency to *look* really different). I'm also a *little* thrown off by Scott's letter in the back, since it kinda comes across to me like I'm not *supposed* to be reading or enjoying this book, but that's just me being weird.

But all that aside, seriously, so long as the story doesn't take too hard a turn into stupid-town, and the art stays this pretty, these will be a very easy four issues to pick up.

[Dominic]

My view of the comic is informed by what I know of the writer.

Or if they, you know, wanted to include female characters but were prevented by the current state of the canon from doing so. This is comics, you're allowed to write in retcons as you see fit.

Backwrites are a peeve of mine, especially when they read like fix-fic.

(Sidebar, what's your beef with exclamation points? The tone of the write-up at the back is pretty clearly enthusiastic and conversational, basically a letters page with no letters for it yet, I don't see what the problem is. If exclamation points aren't meant to be used 'non-sarcastically', then what the fuck is the point of a language having them in the first place?)

They have no place in legitimate writing aside from use in quotation (where they cannot be avoided), sarcasm or examples of what not to do. The more exclamation marks something has, the less important it really is.

The thing that's *really* drawing me in about this book though, is the art. I seriously cannot overstate how pretty this thing is. The lineart has a great, characteristic look to it (kinda like TFPrime, but with some actual personality to it) and is the only medium thus far that has gotten me to like Windblade's design (I very rarely find myself compelled to want a TF toy specifically because of a piece of media, but this one issue has me looking forward to Windblade's toy based on how much it got her design to grow on me).

The art is not bad. But, it does not work for a TF book.

[Shockwave]

My view of the comic is informed by what I know of the writer.

Great. So you've reviewed the writer and not the comic. Which has consistently been one of my complaints about some of your reviews. What was the story about? What elements does it set up? What ideas are being expressed? Or, what ideas are Windblade being used to depict and to what effect? What are events in this book going to mean for the remaining issues or for the rest of IDW's books?

See, this is the kind of stuff I'm looking for in a review (I'm speaking for myself), I honestly couldn't care less about what the writer had to say about it now or even 6 months ago. Especially in a situation like this where previous and likely current comments are largely used as publicity stunts.

Also, Prowl, the "Slug" thing was resolved in "Dark Cybertron". Someone referred to him as "Slag" and he said "The name's Slug now".

[BWprowl]

My view of the comic is informed by what I know of the writer.

Except that's out of hand here, you're letting your (perhaps overreacted) feelings on what the author wrote on a message board several months prior effect your evaluation and 'review' of the published material itself, not to mention seemingly giving more scoring weight to the single page of back-matter than to any of the fictional content within. You're free to disparage the author's postings (and seeing as they're on a message board, even directly debate them yourself) but letting them directly affect the grade you give their work in a review is just nonsensical, not to mention needlessly vindictive.

I may think Orson Scott Card is a horrible human being for the things he's said about homosexuality, but were I to review Ender's Game, that's not going to affect how I evaluate the work itself.

Backwrites are a peeve of mine, especially when they read like fix-fic.

This is no different than Furman revealing that Jhiaxus was a secret senator everyone forgot about, or Roberts making Magnus the Dread Pirate, erm, Roberts, or that the Matrix was a map the whole time. It's a minor backstory reveal intended to work a new element into the canon. You're just saddlesore because it introduces girl robots that girls might want to read about.

They have no place in legitimate writing aside from use in quotation (where they cannot be avoided), sarcasm or examples of what not to do. The more exclamation marks something has, the less important it really is.

That ain't exactly an essay Scott's putting up in the back there, like I said, it's clearly more of an introduction to what'll be a letters/talkback page, and the tone is appropriately conversational. The points are perfectly acceptable in that context.

The art is not bad. But, it does not work for a TF book.

Elaborate.

Also, Prowl, the "Slug" thing was resolved in "Dark Cybertron". Someone referred to him as "Slag" and he said "The name's Slug now".

That's what I get for skipping a whole story arc! I'll retract my complaint about them not trying, in that case (especially since, hey, I understand why Slag's name has to be changed everywhere, eventually).

[Dominic]

I may think Orson Scott Card is a horrible human being for the things he's said about homosexuality, but were I to review Ender's Game, that's not going to affect how I evaluate the work itself.

It matters when a writers statements and views relate to their work. Scott made statements about Furman's work that relate to her back-writing and finding sexism where none existed. Similarly, Card's universalism (and being NeoCon) very much influenced (and diminished) the resolution of "Ender's Game".

This is no different than Furman revealing that Jhiaxus was a secret senator everyone forgot about, or Roberts making Magnus the Dread Pirate, erm, Roberts, or that the Matrix was a map the whole time. It's a minor backstory reveal intended to work a new element into the canon. You're just saddlesore because it introduces girl robots that girls might want to read about.

I tend to think that the Jhiaxus thing was Furman's original plan. And, it was never meant to go back and "fix" anything that Furman's predecessors wrote. Scott came in, calling Furman out for being a horrible misogynist and then back-wrote a whole damned thing.

Elaborate.

Her style is not right for a book about robots set on a metal planet. It would work for...MLP. I could see it working for some superhero books (any of the "Green Lantern" books for example). But, it does not work here.

[BWprowl]

It matters when a writers statements and views relate to their work. Scott made statements about Furman's work that relate to her back-writing and finding sexism where none existed.

And where, exactly, is that affecting the comic, particularly in a negative way? (I'll get to the 'back-writing' thing in a moment)

Similarly, Card's universalism (and being NeoCon) very much influenced (and diminished) the resolution of "Ender's Game".

Then in your review you say "And Card kinda botched the resolution, owing to his unconventional political views" not "I disagree with Card! Grade: EEEEEFFFFF!!!!!"

Scott came in, calling Furman out for being a horrible misogynist and then back-wrote a whole damned thing.

Scott said no such thing, I read her spiel. Her point was that she understood where Furman's idea was coming from, but that it inadvertently was kind of inappropriate an could be taken offensively (and you know what, much as I liked Spotlight: Arcee, I tend to agree with her) and wanted to go her own direction with the idea of female TFs. If fanatical fans jumped on that point and started calling Furman a horrible misogynist, that's on them, but don't act like Scott's the bad guy here just because she happened to disagree with a narrative choice Furman made.

Anyway, the back-write was one of necessity anyway, given that she was contracted by HASBRO to write an in-canon story about this new, female character they were making a big deal of introducing. Even if she'd gone the possible "Jhiaxus actually sex-changed a bunch of other TFs!" route, it still would have been a 'back-write', and this way we get the concept of female TFs in general introduced into the whole of IDW's canon without the whole thing being weighed down by Jhiaxus's doing the way Arcee is.

Finally, she didn't 'back-write a whole thing', she chucked a less-than-ten-word explanation onto the panel that just handwaved it as them evolving genders off-world over time (and there's precedent in previous works for off-world TFs evolving).

And we don't even know if the 'back-write' came from Scott, or whichever of IDW's two main writers originally introduced these city-talkin' girlbots in Dark Cybertron, so whatever.

Her style is not right for a book about robots set on a metal planet. It would work for...MLP. I could see it working for some superhero books (any of the "Green Lantern" books for example). But, it does not work here.

I disagree. TFs can and have looked great in any number of art styles (Animated and BM come to mind). The characters in 'Windblade' still look distinctly robotic, and Stone's art lends a welcome 'identity' to the setting that many previous iterations lacked (instead having leaned on co-opting the G1 artstyle).