Okay, this was the one post I remembered from before the crash. Or at least what number I was on when I started the thread originally. I don't know if we need spoiler space since the issue is two weeks old but I put spoiler in the title so don't read any further if you haven't read it. Its not like a real review anyway and I don't give much away.
I picked up my comics this week and my issue of 1602 was there. I did take some time to read it last night and, while I wasn't disappointed, I didn't find it as good as it could have been.
The art was good but not consistent. And there was something missing to the story. I can't quite put my finger on it but it was off.
Things I did like, and can remember:
Matthew, the blind minstrel: I liked the depiction of him and loved the Ballad of the Fantastic he began to sing.
Doctor Stephen Strange: Being the Queen's physician was a good choice. And when he said something about going home to the village of Greenwich, I laughed.
Warren (did they give a name?): His story of what happened to his mother and his thoughts as he waited to be burned were well written. But he was the only one of the 'witchbreed' I cared for in this first issue.
Sir Nicholas Fury, the Queen's intelligencer: Liked his title and he was portrayed as a good Machiavellian archetype.
What I didn't like:
Peter Parquagh: Eh. A kid fascinated with spiders. But there must be a reason Fury keeps him around. And I hope it isn't for special 'favors'.
"John" Grey: Badly drawn unless 'he' is supposed to be so obviously Jean that it was intentional.
The Inquisitor: Is that really supposed to be Magneto? Eww!
The "Witchbreed": Scotius and Robert (I don't remember the last names). I'm also assuming that Pietro and Sister Wanda are also witchbreed and the Inquisitor doesn't know or overlooks it. Maybe these characters just need some more fleshing out in the coming issues.
Queen Elizabeth: Shouldn't she be using the Royal 'we' when she speaks? Either this is a Gaiman red herring or he screwed up since she does use personal pronouns in some of her appearances.
Unless this epic event gets better it'll be another Marvel title that doesn't live up to the hype. Not saying it isn't good just not what was hyped.
[ August 23, 2003, 07:37 PM: Message edited by: Lightning Lad ]
Posted by DrakeB3003 on :
Well, deja vu and all ... from the "preboot" version of this thread, I remember saying that it kinda reminds me of that X-Men issue where New York was remade by Kulan Gath as a barbaric city and the heroes stuck there were altered but maintained some of their interpersonal relationships and powers. Gaiman has stated that this is NOT an Elseworlds, so I'll stick around to see if they get into what has happened to the Marvel Universe (I suspect the Cosmic Cube, but we'll see (I just hope it's not another "made by Franklin Richards" reality)). That fact and Gaiman's past accomplishments will keep me coming back for at least one or two more issues.
Btw, Comics Continuum has an article with an annotated 1602. It mentions some of Gaiman's historical references, and his oblique (and not so oblique) references to the Marvel U. One thing I completely missed was the Native *American* blonde character "Rojhaz" was Steve *Rogers*, Captain America.
Posted by Lightning Lad on :
I totally missed that connection. I was trying to figure out who a blonde Native American was supposed to be. And what about the little girl? That one went over my head as well. Plus her look was a little to manga (sp?) for me.
And I remember you mentioning the Kulan Gath story Drake. I was wanting to dig it out and read it again as it was one of my favorite X stories but all my X books, with the exception of the current Ultimate series and Exiles, are in storage.
Posted by Omni Craig on :
I only skimmed 1602 at the shop yesterday, but I couldn't bring myself to buy it. I like Gaiman's work, but it wasn't quite "on" enough for me to say "I've gotta have this".
Plus I can't really afford another book in my budget right now, without dropping another at this point (and that includes minis).
Maybe when its a TPB?
[ August 24, 2003, 12:21 AM: Message edited by: Omni Craig ]
Posted by DrakeB3003 on :
quote:Originally posted by Lightning Lad: I totally missed that connection. I was trying to figure out who a blonde Native American was supposed to be. And what about the little girl?
Considering the white hair and the odd weather, it might be Storm ?(there was also an actual historically similar mission where a native-born colonial child was sent back to England as an envoy of some kind -- the specifics are on that comicscontinuum page I mentioned).
Posted by Estimate Lad on :
Just bought 1601 #1. I must say that I'm not overly impresses. The writings good, the art consistent but somehow it just doesn't connect with me. As far as i can tell it's supposed to be "in continuity" and not an elseworlds type story. Personally it looks like an excuse to see how many Marvel characters Gaiman can fit into Elizabethan times. I'll keep buying it as its only a mini-series. I'm hoping it'll go some place over the remaining issues.
Posted by Bevis on :
quote:Originally posted by Lightning Lad: Queen Elizabeth: Shouldn't she be using the Royal 'we' when she speaks? Either this is a Gaiman red herring or he screwed up since she does use personal pronouns in some of her appearances.
If I remember correctly the 'royal we' is actually quite a modern affectation brought in by the Hanoverians. I might be wrong about that but Gaimen is pretty good at checking things like that for historical accuracy (and he certainly knows the Elizabethan period very well and the probable way people spoke) so I think it's unlikely to be a mistake, unless of course it was a mistake made by the letteres or something.
Posted by Kid Prime on :
Is there any historical documentation to her "We are not amused" line, or is that apocryphal?
Posted by Quislet, Esq on :
quote:Originally posted by Kid Prime: Is there any historical documentation to her "We are not amused" line, or is that apocryphal?
I believe the "We are not amused" Line is attributed to Queen Victoria, not Liz. I have also heard/read that the anti-homosexuallaws in England from Victoria's time don't mention lesbians because Victoria insisted that there weren't any such women.
Posted by Kid Prime on :
Ah. My bad.
Posted by Bevis on :
The 'we are not amused' line is completely apocryphal although Victoria certainly used the royal We.
I've heard the same story about her not believing that there were lesbians (or even that women got pleasure from sex) but I don't know whether it's true or not. It's certainly true that the UK sex laws have never mentioned lesbian sex though so it could be true. Then again it might just be a made up explanation for why there are no laws to do with it.
Posted by DrakeB3003 on :
quote:Originally posted by DrakeB3003:
quote:Originally posted by Lightning Lad: And what about the little girl?
Considering the white hair and the odd weather, it might be Storm ?
After reading it again, she says something about being afraid of "changing" and hurting others -- so, I have no idea who this could be. I remember Gaiman saying something to the effect that he was using older Marvel characters for some reason (only those who appeared before 1962?) so there's no Wolverine and no modern characters to choose from.
Posted by Kid Prime on :
I finally read it! Since her name is Virginia, I think she's She-Hulk. I know Virginia isn't quite the same as Jennifer, but it's damn close. And Rojahz (Sp?) is definitely Cap (Steve Rogers.)
Posted by DrakeB3003 on :
: :
Posted by Danny Blaine on :
The girl seems like Snowbird from Alpha Flight... but that can't be right...
Posted by Amentep on :
Snowbird is who my brother keeps saying he thinks it is, but I keep disagreeing with him!
Posted by Sanity or Madness? on :
Well, if she's meant to equivicate to a MU character, isn't Narya the only one that works?
Posted by DrakeB3003 on :
She wasn't created early enough -- I think Gaiman's only sticking to Marvel characters from a certain era (I forgot the cut-off, but that's why the X-Men are only the originals). I'd guess she's a new element that's introduced just for this story.
Posted by Star Boy on :
More info on Virginia Dare; she's a real person... Virginia Dare Posted by Cobalt Kid on :
I'm pretty sure that Gaiman is using Virginia Dare as the main reason that the Marvel heroes and villians are in the past to begin with.
Thanks Wayne for the link! It is just the kind of thing that Gaiman loves, and her dissapearance may lead to her being brought back to the MU proper. Why? Well, it would give Gaiman his own creation in the Marvel Universe, and may be one of his upcoming projects. Also, it makes sense. Time and time again, Gaiman and Joe Quesada have said that this "isn't an elseworlds" and "take place in actual MU continuity". Well, so far, that's not really that true. Even if it did take place in actual MU continuity, then they'd just be sent back home and nothing would be changed. Unless, Virginia Dare comes back with them and is part of Gaiman's next project, in modern times. Then, this would explain why 1602 is 'truly' part of Marvel continuity.
Well, that's my theory.
I thought the latest issue was the best yet, so much happened! The best part was the introduction of Thor, since I didn't make the connection of Donal to Donald Blake (shame on me, I'm a huge Thor fan!). Then the FF, the X-Men, Matt Murdock, Fury and Dugan and Thor all united in taking down Dr. Doom! Very well written!
Since Rojaz, the Native American with Virginia Dare, is drawn to look like Thor on purpose, to throw us off from Donal being the real Thor (with his walking stick as Mjolnir, the treasure of the Templars), it'll be interesting to see who Rojaz really is too! I wonder what connection Virginia and Rojaz have to the calamity in the skies and the heroes thrown back through time. I was thinking Galactus all along, but now I don't know...
Other cool things:
The dinosaurs on the New World. In the back round two issues ago, there are dinosaurs chasing pilgrims. Definately done by Gaiman on purpose, since it's pretty well established that he's meticulous in planning what is drawn in each panel. I wonder if he'll come back to this.
John Grey- Obviously Jean from the beginning, and I found myself smiling. I figured that any other writer might make me suspect that the artist was messing up a bit, but I know that Gaiman probably urged the artist to draw Jean as a girl, despite being called a boy.
Queen Elizabeth and James of Scottland- great use of real characters! I wish he had more time to do other ones!
And Fury and Strange- the best two reasons for buying this book! Gaiman does a great job with them, they are the stars so far. I wish he could do a mini or ongoing with either character!
Posted by Sanity or Madness? on :
Rojaz = Steve Rodgers, Captain America. That's been blatant all along.
Posted by Cobalt Kid on :
So where is Tony Stark then?
Posted by Cobalt Kid on :
And Hank Pym ?
Posted by Bedlam Lad on :
Hank Pym is there. He's just so small no one can see him.
And I've been enjoying this series as well. Elseworld style tales are some of my favourate comic stories, and I'm loving this series.
My one worry is how everything is going to be tied up in the final issue. I just hope it isn't rused or anything and this tale gets the ending it deserves.
Posted by Sanity or Madness? on :
quote:Originally posted by Cobalt Kid: So where is Tony Stark then?
quote:As for other characters, Gaiman said that he ended around 1969 in regards to when characters originally debuted – although there are many others included for those who look. Iron Man/Tony Stark, Gaiman explained won’t be in the miniseries, as he just couldn’t find a way to make him work to his satisfaction.
I remembered the "No Stark" bit - but I forgot about the "many others included for those who look"...
[ February 13, 2004, 08:23 AM: Message edited by: Sanity or Madness? ]
Posted by Cobalt Kid on :
Thanks SoM!
So I guess no Iron Man. We've already seen Bruce Banner, so that pretty much leaves The Pyms and Namor as the only two early Marvel characters that aren't getting the works so far.
(Unless I totally missed Namor, but I'm too tired right now to remember )
Posted by Sanity or Madness? on :
And, having just read 1602 #7, I think I can safely say that there'll be no doubt in your minds as to who "Rojhaz" is after you read the last page Posted by Bedlam Lad on :
Yeah, that bit utterly threw me. But I think it makes sence and should work. This is the second time I've been thrown by the last pannel on a book (the other time being Runaways #9).
Posted by DrakeB3003 on :
I'm disappointed that we won't be seeing Iron Man in any form -- even if only to see what kind of redesigned armor Tony would wear for this time period.
And yeah, that last panel threw me for a loop-a-doop!
Posted by Cobalt Kid on :
Yeah, me too!
So what do you guys think? Cap is frozen in ice and makes it back to the past, or is it some other kind of time travel story?
And who else thinks that Virginia Dare is going back to the future with him?
Either way, this issue was very, very good! Great stuff!
Posted by DrakeB3003 on :
I keep thinking the cosmic cube has something to do with it.
The time disturbance happened in 1587, fifteen years before this story -- Cap doesn't necessarily look older.
It's a shame that this thing is being wrapped up next month -- I feel like it's only gotten interesting since last month, like the real story has only just started after months of setup.
Posted by Cobalt Kid on :
I agree Drake, I wish it could on a little longer! Like you said, there was so much set-up and only now is the payoff. At least next issue is double-sized!
I want more Gaiman work from Marvel and DC! I wouldn't mind seeing him continue this story in some strange way...
Posted by Sanity or Madness? on :
quote:Originally posted by Cobalt Kid: So what do you guys think? Cap is frozen in ice and makes it back to the past, or is it some other kind of time travel story?
Go back & look at Uatu's explaination in #6 - time's collapsing because Cap got chucked back in time the "wrong" way. Instead of going "round" time, he went *through* it, breaking it as he went. Somehow, this story will need to completely unhappen at the end, as the universe will end long before the present comes back round again.
Although I wouldn't be surprised if Virginia ended up in the present after all, if she's not Snowbird.
[ February 17, 2004, 03:53 AM: Message edited by: Sanity or Madness? ]
Posted by Disaster Boy on :
anyone excited about 1602: new world?
i will probably get it i liked the art from thor son of asgard and pak did a decent job with phoenix endsong.
Posted by Caliente on :
Endsong!! Sooo good.
I'm... hesitant to get excited, though. 1602 was so awesome, y'know? I'm afraid that, like most sequels, it won't live up to the original.
I'll be reading it, don't get me wrong. Just don't wanna be tooo hopeful.
Posted by Disaster Boy on :
a little weird though, because didnt they set the timestream right at the end of 1602?
Posted by Caliente on :
Yup. Who knows?? Maybe it's straight up What If... ? Or maybe it's a new twist. I'm hoping the latter myself.
Posted by DrakeB3004 on :
I'm a big fan of Iron Man so I might check out the new series to see what the 1602 Iron Man is about, but I was actually really let down by the series and wouldn't think about buying it otherwise.
Posted by Disaster Boy on :
![[bump]](graemlins/bump.gif)
:
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
?
![[Smile]](smile.gif)