This site will work and look better in a browser that supports web standards, but it is accessible to any browser or Internet device.

Whedonesque - a community weblog about Joss Whedon
"I am NOT a sidekick!"
11945 members | you are not logged in | 25 October 2014




Tweet







December 14 2010

(SPOILER) Preview pages for Angel #40. It's out tomorrow.

I didn't realize there was a new artist. Not a huge fan of it off of first glance, it is a little cartoony for my taste. I prefer a grittier look for Angel Comics. I do really like the Casagrande "Blade Runner" homage, that is neat.

The story seems interesting, but I have to admit the art is distracting me. Sometimes its just a matter of getting used to things. Some of the characters don't look like themselves; Gunn for example. And I think Felicia Day has taken over the role of Laura.

[ edited by Jelly on 2010-12-14 17:17 ]
Hmm... at first I disliked the art, but as I kept reading, I realized it added another dimension to the Angelverse we haven't seen for a while. A less serious feel to it. Not sure I'd care for it in the long run, but it's not too bad with change. Just hope nothing dramatics happens in this issue. Wrong art for epic stuff.

The writing seems okay. Nothing extremely impressive, but I want to read the rest. Glad that the Gunn vs Connor issue is touched upon and that Laura makes fun of it. Not sure if the african-american thing makes sense. Since Connor had the memories of a typical american teen, and the hell world memories, he would know very well about racism. Maybe Gunn didn't think of that. I'd still like for Connor to say "Duh, obviously" or something to that effect.

[ edited by Skytteflickan88 on 2010-12-14 17:28 ]
Gotta say ... not a fan of the art. Maybe it's my background as an artist, but if I don't care for a comic's artwork, it takes me out of the rest of it. Not that I've really kept up with the Angel comics lately, and I honestly have no idea what's going on it them, but still ... I'm not impressed with these pages.
Oh dear. I really don't think much of the art I'm afraid. A tad too cartoonish for my taste.
Actually, this is one of the best previews of IDW's Angel I have seen for a while. Even despite the art. The story is getting better, and it's getting back its weird but touching sense of humor. I especially liked the Holland's statue touch. And the dynamic within the Angel-team-mini is not half as bad as it used to be. Maybe it is the absence of Spike, who was always written extremely awkwardly in the latest issues, but weirdly enough even Laura and her floating demon-pedia work.
Ugh. I really dislike the art.

Other than that... meh. I was expecting just a bit more from this series. I was under the impression that the Wolfram & Hart arc would bring Angel back up to the quality of ATF in time to close out, but not so much it seems. Oh well. I suppose it was given the (perhaps impossible) task of reconciling the Angel of AtS and ATF with the Angel of BS8. And who knows. It could get better in the next 4 issues. But, man, that art is a setback. Anyone know if this artist is going to continue?
Well, I'm with everyone on not liking the art. The characters are barely recognizable and they all look like elfs ... pointy ears and all. Not buying any of this I'm afraid. And I love Angel.
They finally get a decent story, and then ruin it with horrible art. :/ I don't think I'll be buying these after all. I hope the Illyria artist stays on that, though.
at first glance i thought this was a Buffy #40 preview but,i got so excitied but nevermind. I haven't read Angel: Aftermath YET! Cause it's not cannon I'm going to wait until it comes out in a trade. Maybe I'll use the six month break between season eight and nine of Buffy to catch up on Angel. I have been collecting Spike, to seee how it'll lead into season eight and because i think Bryan Lynch is a great writer. I gotta agree with EVERYONE on this, the artwork is horrible, are you telling me there was no one better to do it. That there was no one else available who could draw beter then that.
@ Nathan.

Angel Aftermath (issue 18-22) is out in hardcover. Not sure if it's out in tradepaperback. There has been several (two?) other hardcovers of the ongoing Angel series released after that as well.
Hmm. Well, the art might not be the greatest but at least I understood what was going on.

I keep thinking that one day, good artwork and good storytelling will come together to keep me interested in any of these comics.
Wow, did they get a fan artist from deviantart to draw these? Seriously.
I looked her up and she's worked at Marvel and on other books. Might be the inker though, or just that she's from another style.

My brother was in the top 100 of the comic book challenge with his realistic style but the winner was a very cartoony artist I didn't like.
This might just be the geek in me, but I wish Michael Turner (Witchblade, Aspen) was still alive and could team up with Joss Whedon to draw a series -- whether it be Buffy, Angel or something else entirely.
Not wild about the art and caught a typo on the first page.

Is there an in-story reason for why the art style changed so dramatically? Or is it just 'cause? I wish IDW would be more consistent with their artists.

[ edited by Emmie on 2010-12-15 13:59 ]
The writing seems okay. Nothing extremely impressive, but I want to read the rest.

The writing and editing are (in keeping with IDW tradition) fucking incompetent - from the shabby high-school-level synopsis copy ('he discovers humans have become a complete underclass') to Angel defying the laws of physics and grammar on page 2 ('jumping off the building...gives me some time to think...like how much landing is gonna hurt,' plus the bit about 'reaching' a statue from a dead fall?!) to comma and apostrophe errors everywhere, to a brainless 'this isn't [exposition], it's as if [exposition]' on page 4, to the weird insertion of the word 'bald' on page 5 or 6 (my mind was broken by the shabbiness and I had to close all my browser windows).

I don't care about the artist having his/her own style; it's a comic book, that happens. But it'd be nice to know that the official Angel book contains dialogue, pacing, art, or really anything at all that resembles or is evocative of (y'know) the hundred hours of television that is its primary source material. And beyond that, it'd be nice if IDW put an editor on this book who paid half as much attention to detail as Scott Allie (to whom other much more serious criticisms still apply).
waxbanks wins the thread.
It's like someone said, "let's get Guy Davis to do the art for the next book!" Then someone told him he worked for Dark Horse and then reminded him that Angel was going back to Dark Horse and that they were going to be loosing the title. Then they got sad. Then they got drunk. And then they said, "Frak it, (it's still cool to say 'Frak' right?), let's just get someone that draws like Guy Davis but isn't Guy Davis." So in a drunken art viewing they picked this artist and said, "Here Guy Davis. Make us pretty pictures. Also, it would be funny if you made the red head look like that other red head. No. The other other one. Not the witch."
And they slept it off. Checked their Blackberries and saw that the matter had been dealt with without recollection of the matter nor at the very least whom they picked for the book's art.
During this same night, as waxbanks pointed out, they must have decided to make their own drunken revisions to the script. Just ot amp up the awesome so Dark Horse could suck it. This is my assumption.
But at least the cover art is fricken' balls awesome.
I don't think it was ever cool to say "frak". Doesn't mean people need to stop saying it.

You need to log in to be able to post comments.
About membership.



joss speaks back home back home back home back home back home