Wednesday, October 31, 2007

HALLOWEEN BLOG EXTRA

Ahh, yes... instead of a weekender last week or this coming one, I'm splitting the difference with a very "day appropriate" Blog Extra. What goes better with Halloween than vampires? Just about nothing, so here's an early look at the latest book coming from Harris Publications.

That book would be VAMPIRELLA QUARTERLY: FALL 2007, written by Joshua Hale Fialkov and drawn by Stephen Segovia. This issue brings to a close the storyline dealing with Vampi taking on her nemesis the Red Queen and the Queen's attempts to raise Chaos itself. At the end of part two, she succeeded, using the body of Vampirella's lover Adam in order to do it. As you might guess, she found that sort of problematic.

Parts one and two have been just fine on a story level, but Segovia's art has been dragging down the book and continues to do so. He seems incapable here of actually just telling the story; instead, he puts most of his energy into making sure he can contort Vampirella into one stupidly contortioned pose after another, or flat out making panels that focus on her ass (with the occasional crotch shot). Frankly, it's embarrassing. Other artists have worked on the character and shown how to balance the needs of the story with the needs of those who spank over the character's costume. Segovia's work never comes close.

And unfortunately, the story kind of crashes in this climax, too. A HUGE deus ex machina moment crops up to change the course of how things are going, and the ending feels artificial on top of it. Fialkov is a smart writer, so this is an abberation, and I was surprised by it.

Happily, we get another Archie Goodwin/Jose Gonzalez reprint in this issue, and it's another dandy. I'd pick up these books on the strength of the classic tales alone.

Still, Vampirella deserves better, and so do the readers. Cheesecake is fine, as long as it's served with some actual storytelling ability, and you just don't get it here. Picking up the latest VAMPIRELLA QUARTERLY is a scary prospect, indeed.

/Mason

No comments: