January 10 2008
AICN Comics' review of Angel: After the Fall #2.
Story: Great!! Artwork: Not so much.
You need to log in to be able to post comments.
About membership.
This site will work and look better in a browser that supports web standards, but it is accessible to any browser or Internet device.

I'll keep buying it, because it's Angel, but they really need to address some quality control issues.
Whistler | January 10, 01:25 CET
The plots great and I cant wait for the next one!
Beren77 | January 10, 02:49 CET
Personally I am there for the story.I also wouldnt say the art is 'bad' - its just a style. I look at things like 'Sin City'. I was going to buy one of the books after I saw the film, but when I saw the art I decided not to bother. I thought it was awful.
For me After the Fall works, story and art - so I am happy!
[ edited by angeliclestat on 2008-01-10 00:11 ]
angeliclestat | January 10, 03:10 CET
Out of Objects | January 10, 03:21 CET
Don't get me wrong, I think the story in Angel:ATF has been outstanding thus far. I can't wait to get my mitts on #3.
Whistler | January 10, 03:29 CET
DaddyCatALSO | January 10, 03:50 CET
menomegirl | January 10, 03:54 CET
A shame, since it really does pull me out of the issue.
NimNams | January 10, 05:32 CET
DaddyCatALSO | January 10, 05:34 CET
I'm loving the story so far.
[ edited by toast on 2008-01-10 02:50 ]
toast | January 10, 05:48 CET
The art kinda sucks. Like others have said, though, it's entirely subjective. Franco Urru's work just doesn't do anything for me (except for that shiny #1 variant cover).
It's very far from being the worst art I've ever seen, but it's distracting, confusing, and seems rushed.
The comic itself, though, is great. I come for the story, and I'm getting greatness in spades.
[ edited by UnpluggedCrazy on 2008-01-10 02:52 ]
UnpluggedCrazy | January 10, 05:51 CET
ohbejoyful | January 10, 06:15 CET
As someone who isn't a regular reader of comics, I'm a bit hesitant to comment on this thread but I simply must disagree with the above. I had no trouble whatsoever recognizing Gunn when he first appeared in issue 1 or with knowing that he was the vampire on the last page.
menomegirl | January 10, 06:53 CET
That gaffe aside, I'm really enjoying the artwork in this series, more so than that in Buffy S8. The more stylized, not-so-defined look just really appeals to me and I think lends a bit more weight to the hell-on-earth setting.
Roland the Headless Thompson Gunner | January 10, 07:42 CET
Also, I knew who the vampire was in the final panel of issue #1.
[ edited by crazygolfa on 2008-01-10 05:08 ]
crazygolfa | January 10, 08:07 CET
Beren77 | January 10, 08:24 CET
SoddingNancyTribe | January 10, 09:22 CET
[ edited by Beren77 on 2008-01-10 08:26 ]
Beren77 | January 10, 11:04 CET
Merlinmaus | January 10, 13:41 CET
Simon | January 10, 15:10 CET
menomegirl | January 10, 19:23 CET
But dislike the art I do. Really, really dislike it. I didn't like Urru's work on Shadow Puppets or Asylum, either. I find it overly busy, confusing visually, indistinct and muddy. I think that Brian's words and story would be much better served using a different artist
As for the story? I'm enjoying it and can't wait to see where it goes.
phlebotinin | January 10, 19:49 CET
embers | January 10, 20:41 CET
Buffyfantic | January 10, 21:18 CET
:S
I looked, and looked again, not trusting my own eyes, but still I kept perceiving the same stupid image: 'Okaayyy, he's a vampire, he's crouching over a victim and drinking her, but they've taken off his trousers (pants) (huh??!) and for some reason the skin on his legs is goth-tastically pale???'
I only figured out it was the corpse a week or two later. But obviously, that was just me...
fangless | January 10, 21:55 CET
deborahmm | January 10, 22:15 CET
I knew about Gunn's proposed storyline, and I had alarms ringing not only from his scene with that rescued woman, but also from him being too brash with his crew. Still, I wasn't sure if that was him on the last page, but as I already suspected him I went back and checked if he had those stripes on his sleeves before. Yes, he's had, but stripes on sleeves don't a clear visual clue make.
That is my only big gripe with the art so far - and mind you, it's not easy to make a character clearly recognizable when it's the first time we are seeing him in vamp face. I don't think anyone could pull it off without extra clues. But Gunn had a clue - a scar under eye. Pity it wasn't used.
As for the rest of it - yep, that guy really didn't like the art. Pity he didn't explain why, I know it's subjective but some justifications would be nice, especially in the official review even if it's for AICN.
I was being pretty vocal here as Franco's fan, didn't want to preach again, but just wanted to suggest to think a bit outside the box, as Franco's art is unusual and innovative. And maybe the negative reaction is due to it not looking like the usual comic art which often is on a cartoony side with sharp outlines etc.? Also it is very dense, it packs a lot into each panel and panels are generally small, and it suits Brian Lynch style very well as Brian stories pack a lot of information into each page. More than I've seen in any other comic so far.
And this art requires closer scrutiny to get all the clues and details - but in the end, it's rewarding as it prolongs the enjoyment of the story. And each new find is a bonus.
Except for Gunn's reveal which should have been obvious and in your face, yes.
Likeness/stylization works for me for everyone so far except Nina and Wesley whom I'd prefer to look more like AD and generally have more charisma and angst, as we have that in spades, say, in Angel. And Nina was supposed to be a mystery in the #1 reveal - it was a deliberate tease to make us think she's Harmony first and then - nope, it's Nina. Like Ethan reveal in Buffy 8.03. Same with Mystery Man on #5 cover - it is supposed to be a teaser, vague likeness is intentional.
The art is moody, stylish, interesting and rich in detail. Main heroes are charismatic, dynamic and a treat for a female gaze (which was the case for all Joss shows, by the way). Style might throw some folks off, I see that. But overall - I hope some folks might enjoy it if they give it a chance and be more open-minded about it, especially as we have a promise of some controversial points addressed in the next issues.
Fangless - I too was confused by those legs on Gunn at first. Had to compare with the previous panel of him, where it was more clear he was holding that girl. Yep, that last page was confusing in many ways, I agree.
Nata | January 10, 22:30 CET
Seriously though I have to pipe in with my support for Urru. I love the different style. Is it all to my taste - no. But overall I think it works very well.
On Buffy, I much preferred the artist on issue 10 to Jeanty. Others prefer Jeanty. I wish that Richards was drawing all of Buffy. But he isnt. Will I stop reading. Of course not, simply because I am interested in the story.
Same with Angel. I am so excited for this comic. If the story gets crap (which I doubt, then I will stop. But the art is good enough for me to imagine the actors and the way it would look on screen. Maybe I shouldnt do that with a comic, but I do it anyway:)
angeliclestat | January 10, 23:04 CET
So in threads to come, I'd like to see that the art issue will not be dominating discussions of future issues.
Simon | January 10, 23:04 CET
In Issue #2, I felt like the only character who spoke in a voice that I recognized as his was Connor, who I've never even liked. Maybe he was the only one familiar enough with hell to not have drastically changed to deal with living in it. But I find the disconnect between the characters we left in the alley and the characters we find here to be much more jarring than I have in the Buffy comics.
I'm hoping next issue for Ilyria (who also should be able to handle hell with ease) to be my anchor. And for there to be fewer buxomy barely-clads. I felt like a letchy adolescent while reading this issue on the bus.
WillowSlay | January 10, 23:43 CET