DAREDEVIL #5
( DYING FOR A DEAL? )
Please be warned. The following intoxicating comic book Published by Marvel -- and Created by Mark Waid and Chris Samnee -- is so entertaining to read, I think I may have to kill myself before I can finish this senten.... BANG-BANG-BANG! THUNK-THINK! PING! RIP... August, 2014.
To QUOTE Keyser Söze: 'The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist'.
THE STORY: So there he was, Matt Murdock, telling his old pal Foggy Nelson he should fake his own death if he wants to stay alive. When suddenly, out of the blue -- BOOM! -- A giant sized opportunity fortunately presented itself. One that involves a mechanical frog, a sneaky plan, plus an indelible hero who will eventually make the 'ultimate sacrifice' and save the day.
Well, I think he does, anyhow.
THE GOOD: Now how on Earth could I not love reading this issue of 'Daredevil'? Well, being a big fan of character driven plots involving retro concepts and visual tomfoolery, immediately I was completely blown over by what it had on offer.
As per usual Chris' cartoon-like yet personable illustrations aided Mark's simplistic narrative. Whilst in turn Mark's narrative helped drive the idea behind this tale on its own merry way
You see, in essence, this story had to do three things for you to buy into what it was trying to sell. Firstly, it had to make you believe that Foggy needed to hide away from prying eyes. Secondly, it had to add a personal tone to its concept -- such as the 'buddy-buddy' or the 'Ant Man' elements -- as well as a sense of danger at the closing stages of the plot. And thirdly, well...
THE BAD: As much as I loved the characters, the concept, and the overall execution of this great stand-alone adventure, the one thing I wasn't a big fan of were the coincidences that supported the initial premise.
Hey! Let's face it. One minute it was like, 'Hey Foggy, we need to fake your death or else my enemies will kill you'. Whereas the next minute it was like, 'Well I be damned! Problem solved!'. Ding!
THE MUSIC: I was wondering if someone out there can help me answer the following question. Why-oh-why-oh-why-oh-why did the theme tune to 'Dragnet' pop into my mind as soon as I finished reading this issue? I have no logical explanation for this whatsoever. Especially since I haven't watched this program in years, plus I can't for the life of me see what it has to do with this tale.
As per usual Chris' cartoon-like yet personable illustrations aided Mark's simplistic narrative. Whilst in turn Mark's narrative helped drive the idea behind this tale on its own merry way
You see, in essence, this story had to do three things for you to buy into what it was trying to sell. Firstly, it had to make you believe that Foggy needed to hide away from prying eyes. Secondly, it had to add a personal tone to its concept -- such as the 'buddy-buddy' or the 'Ant Man' elements -- as well as a sense of danger at the closing stages of the plot. And thirdly, well...
THE BAD: As much as I loved the characters, the concept, and the overall execution of this great stand-alone adventure, the one thing I wasn't a big fan of were the coincidences that supported the initial premise.
Hey! Let's face it. One minute it was like, 'Hey Foggy, we need to fake your death or else my enemies will kill you'. Whereas the next minute it was like, 'Well I be damned! Problem solved!'. Ding!
THE MUSIC: I was wondering if someone out there can help me answer the following question. Why-oh-why-oh-why-oh-why did the theme tune to 'Dragnet' pop into my mind as soon as I finished reading this issue? I have no logical explanation for this whatsoever. Especially since I haven't watched this program in years, plus I can't for the life of me see what it has to do with this tale.
THE COMPARISON: Essentially this adventure was about a coincidental occurrence which inadvertently helped a man out with his problem. And in my book, nothing says 'coincidental occurrence' more than any f*cking soap opera you can see on television. Ha!
THE CONCLUSION: I'm sure some of you have heard the news in the press about a new Daredevil television series being developed. And although to some extent I'm happy about this idea -- which is unusual for me, because I'm not normally enamored by comic book to live-action adaptations -- in the same breath I have to say that this sort of thing also concerns me as well.
Now as some of you may know, I'm always a bit of a sceptic whenever a comic book character is strewn into a more visible public spotlight. Time and again I keep on thinking to myself that 'the powers that be' will cash in on 'their property' as much as they possibly can.
Just take the new 'Arrow' television series for instance. Even though it is a very viable and creative franchise in its own right, deep down inside me I know the essential character it conveys is nothing like the original Oliver Queen. He doesn't sport a goatee. He looks like a male model. And by default the hard travelling and more frivolous aspects of Ollie's personality has been cast off into the wind.
But do you know what the worst thing about all of this is, dear reader? It's that this 'update' has also carried on into his comic book series. Not that this is major-major problem, of course. From my point of view the current creative team on that title are doing an amazing job on it. Yet -- whilst saying that -- I wouldn't like to see the same thing happening to Matt and company over here. Character wise, that is.
Nuff said.
THE CONCLUSION: I'm sure some of you have heard the news in the press about a new Daredevil television series being developed. And although to some extent I'm happy about this idea -- which is unusual for me, because I'm not normally enamored by comic book to live-action adaptations -- in the same breath I have to say that this sort of thing also concerns me as well.
Now as some of you may know, I'm always a bit of a sceptic whenever a comic book character is strewn into a more visible public spotlight. Time and again I keep on thinking to myself that 'the powers that be' will cash in on 'their property' as much as they possibly can.
Just take the new 'Arrow' television series for instance. Even though it is a very viable and creative franchise in its own right, deep down inside me I know the essential character it conveys is nothing like the original Oliver Queen. He doesn't sport a goatee. He looks like a male model. And by default the hard travelling and more frivolous aspects of Ollie's personality has been cast off into the wind.
But do you know what the worst thing about all of this is, dear reader? It's that this 'update' has also carried on into his comic book series. Not that this is major-major problem, of course. From my point of view the current creative team on that title are doing an amazing job on it. Yet -- whilst saying that -- I wouldn't like to see the same thing happening to Matt and company over here. Character wise, that is.
Nuff said.
More posts from David Lee Andrews
.jpg){kind=link}