Saturday, November 1, 2014

Cutting Bait on Person Of Interest

Person of Interest is a CBS show I quickly grew to like when it first appeared in 2011.  Season two was also strong, with the episode "Relevance" the series' best.  On the formulaic checklist of nearly every episode is one or more scenes where nameless bad guy henchmen are killed in gun battles with the heroes.

However, the end of Season 3 began having the heroes shoot the bad guys in the leg, instead of killing them.  It's just ridiculous--a bad guy will be conscious and in possession of his gun, yet due to the wound just gives up the fight?  Of course, if a hero is shot, he/she keeps fighting...

Initially I thought I could suspend disbelief on this issue, and just imagine the bad guys were killed.  I figured the writers were pressured by some idiotic CBS executive to lower the body count.  But then at the end of episode "Brotherhood," the show closes with a corrupt female DEA agent shot in the face, her body dumped in the street with her face to camera.  So for CBS, having a familiar character brutally and graphically killed is acceptable, but killing faceless, nameless stock henchmen is verboten?  

I can't say this is the only reason I'm bailing out, but it's certainly the straw breaking the camel's back.  The logical plot holes keep getting wider, to the point where the show is no longer "smart."  There was a sense of dread in the AI war plot thread, but that's fizzled.

Worst of all, the characters have become non-emotional, predictable, muted, and too far divorced from their origins:

  • John originally paralleled Mel Gibson's character in the first Lethal Weapon--a discarded special forces soldier battling depression and alcoholism in the absence of Purpose and family.  Now he's pretty much a stiff robot.  Not the actor's fault, there just isn't anything going on in John's personal life.
  • Shaw started as something really interesting, as sort of a present day Major Kusanagi from Ghost in the Shell.  Now they've softened her into something more non-threatening like the female agent played by Sandra Bullock in Miss Congeniality.
  • Root was introduced as an ominous sociopath murderess.  A nemesis for Finch.  But like Shaw, she's been softened from a tigress into a pussy cat.
  • Finch's changes make the least sense of all. His original selfless motivations gave John purpose, and even drew Shaw to the cause.  Now he's a scared little rabbit?  Why?    

Can the series be rescued at this point?  Yes.  But for now, I'm out.

Thursday, July 17, 2014

Editorial Critique: Ms. Marvel #1 by G. Willow Wilson and Adrian Alphona

Overall Rating: 9/10 
I'll admit I approached this book with some skepticism, concerned that Marvel's inclination to push a politically correct character would result in a politically correct story, and generally poor story-telling.  I was wrong.  The book carefully dances around blaming anyone for the feelings of alienation experienced by the story's lead character, a Muslim-American teenage girl.  Instead, so far the story is all about her inner struggle and the dramas created by clearly introduced themes.

The story-telling and character building are superb, with some minor missteps I'll discuss below in scene analysis.  There is subtlety without guesswork, which is well taken in a series' first issue.  In other words, a reader knows exactly what this book is about and can make an informed decision as to whether to stay on board or pass.  

Writing Technique: 9/10 
Wilson may have captured the teenage voice even better than Bendis did in Ultimate Spiderman.  Dialogue is economical, realistic, compelling.  Nothing extraneous, well edited.

Story Telling: 8/10 
We don't have a serious plot thread yet, but we know a ton about our main character and quite a bit about the supporting cast.  That's fine for issue #1.    

Characters: 7/10 
Kamala is brilliantly set up.  I'm a little concerned that some of the supporting cast might emerge as caricatures, but let's see where it goes.

Art: 9/10
Rich coloring, judicious balance between detail and abstract, and zany snipes in the backgrounds.  The style of art, for whatever reason, reminds me of Miller's Dark Knight Returns only brighter and more vibrant.  A careful eye exploring the background will notice all manner of mockingly humorous product labels and signage--good for a chuckle but not necessarily affecting the mood of the book, a sort of story within the story.

Scene Analysis:
Scene 1
Story
Two Muslim-American teen girls socialize with the white teen cashier at a neighborhood convenience store before school.  Fellow white students enter, a boy in a varsity sports jacket and a bubbly girl.  The five socialize briefly, and the "jock" invites the other three to a party.  The conversation touches on Islamic cultural issues.  All leave for school.

Commentary
This opening scene is fantastic.  In three pages of compact, natural dialogue, we are well along towards familiarization with our characters' personalities.  Likewise we are overtly introduced to ideas/themes the authors want to explore:  
1.  The notion of there being a spectrum of Islamic religious and cultural observance within the American-Muslim community and the tension among American-Muslims that spectrum creates (at least for now among teens although I suspect the scope will broaden as the book progresses).  Great fuel for conflict and drama!  
2.  The awkwardness or alienation between people of different cultures, even when both are well meaning.  This one is a bit cliche and tired by now, I hope they focus on #1.

Scene 2
Story
Kamala's mother interrupts Kamala while she reviews social media commentary on a piece of Avenger's fan-fiction she wrote.  At her mother's request, Kamala joins the family dinner.  Kamala's father and brother bicker over brother's devotion to religious studies instead of getting a job.  Kamala asks for permission to attend the party that evening, but her father refuses and Kamala returns to her room.

Commentary
Here we see the definite broadening of the theme presented in the previous scene.  The conflict of religious observance is now between Kamala's brother and father, which manifests itself visually with the son's religious dress and the father's secular American business attire.  Indeed, readers already familiar with some interpretations of Islam would notice that the father's working at an American bank (an interest based lender) would be frowned on.  

The dispute between Kamala and her father slightly misses a beat, in the sense that I am left wondering if the authors were aiming at portraying Kamala's father as overprotective (perhaps because of his culture) or instead just like any other American father of a teenage daughter.  After all, he did not immediately say no, and only refused permission after learning it was an unsupervised party, at a waterfront, with drinking around teenage boys.  (I think a father's reluctance under the circumstances is pretty universal, and nothing particular to Islamic culture.)  So were we watching a typical "American" father-daughter dispute, or a "Pakistani" father-daughter dispute?  Or was it intentionally ambiguous so the reader can decide for themselves?  Personally I think clearer intent was in order, but not a serious misstep.  

As for Kamala's authorship of fan fiction, I'm not clear if it signals that in her world super heroes exist only as comic book characters, in real life, or both.  Not important?

Scene 3
Story
Kamala stews over her father's refusal to allow her to go to the party, and generally the alienation from her peers caused by certain aspects of her culture.  The scene closes with her sneaking out her bedroom window.

Commentary
As I mentioned in the prior scene, I was left unsure whether the father's refusal to allow Kamala to attend the party was culturally driven, or simple universal paternal instinct of a teenage father.  Now we see how the reader's uncertainty (well, at least mine) about the father's motives,cultural vs. universal, matter because we don't know what to make of Kamala's rebellion otherwise.

If we're supposed to think the father is "un-American" in his protectiveness, then we view Kamala as embracing American feminism.  We see her rebelling against a culture that oppresses women.  We see her taking her fate into her own hands. 

BUT, if we understand the father's refusal as more universal (or at least within the range of behavior for a "normal" American father), then we would see Kamala differently.  She's the one who misunderstands American culture by assuming all American fathers let their teenage daughters go to unsupervised parties, and misunderstands her father's motives.  Or, we might see her as so full of teenage angst and cultural confusion that despite the universality of her father's protectiveness, she blames their culture unjustly (as all teens are wont to do).

So there is a bit of confusion here about Kamala's character.  For now this is no big deal, because at the core of it is dramatic tension between Kamala and her family's culture.  The nuances will likely work themselves out as we go.  My point is just that a little more care with the dinner table dispute in the previous scene could have avoided the confusion altogether.

Scene 4
Story
Kamala finds her way to the party, a typical scene of dozens of teenagers hanging around, chatting, drinking from cups.  Kamala is offered a drink, but spits it out upon learning it contains alcohol.  The American girl from the first scene, obviously drunk, takes issue with Kamala's curry smell.  Bruno, the cashier from the convenience store, intervenes but advises her to leave.  Kamala argues with Bruno, but storms off.

Commentary  
The authors brilliantly use en vino veritas as a device to allow some ugly (but accurate?) stereotypes to surface without rising to the level of damning critique.  For example, we have no way of knowing if Kamala really smells like curry (it's fair to say that some middle eastern diets can cause this), but maybe she does, and the booze causes Zoe to let slip a comment she'd otherwise keep to herself.  Thus, the authors avoid  portraying the white American girl as a xenophobe stereotype--she was just tipsy!  In the end we get where the authors want to go, i.e. amplifying Kamala's cultural self-consciousness and feelings of alienation.

Arguably the en vino veritas device wasn't necessary, as Bruno is presumably Caucasian and his more upstanding and tolerant behavior foils the ugly stereotypes we could read into Zoe and the Jocks.  And speaking of Bruno, the foreshadowing technique of his love interest in Kamala is cliche, but this is issue #1 and the authors felt the need to put that out there quickly.  We'll see if perhaps it wouldn't have been wiser to hold that thread in reserve and introduce it in a more interesting way.

Scene 5
Story
A misty cloud rolls over the city.  Having left the party and alone on the street, Kamala is overwhelmed by the vapors and passes out.  In a dream or vision, she encounters several of the Avengers, who identify themselves as avatars for "faith."  They briefly discuss Kamala's motivations for sneaking out of her house to the party, and Kamala's identity crisis.   She's told she's about to be "rebooted," her dreams of being a super hero are about to come true, but vaguely warned of unexpected consequences.  She awakens in a cocoon of sorts, and hatches herself out as a tall, blonde, fair-skinned Ms. Marvel in costume.

Commentary
The scene economically summarizes, and perhaps clarifies, Kamala's motivations, stakes and wants.  She doesn't outright reject her parent's culture, but feels very lost in trying to find balance with her American upbringing.  She's aware that her own lack of balance has given false impressions to others, blurring others' ability to understand and relate to her, which leads to social awkwardness and heightened sense of alienation.   I like the fact that neither Kamala nor the authors are exclusively blaming white Americans for Kamala's dilemma.  Rather, she's owning her share of the cause and finding her way through it. Clear, concise, we're ready for issue #2.


Editorial Critique: She-Hulk #6 by Charles Soule, Ron Wimberly

I know I said I was cutting bait on Soule's She-Hulk in my last post, but #6 is so horrible I simply can't stay silent.   As my previous critiques make clear, I haven't been a fan of the series, but usually I can praise Soule's writing technique and dialogue. However, this issue's dialogue was stilted and unnatural. Pulido's art filled in the gaps in Soule's earlier scripts, but now Wimberly's abstract approach is uncomplimentary. The entire series reeks of having been rushed to print.

I plan to move on to critiquing Marvel's new Ms. Marvel run.  I was really skeptical of the premise at first, but there's some interesting story-telling going on in that series, and would recommend it over She-Hulk in a heartbeat.  

Sunday, July 13, 2014

Editorial Critique: She-Hulk #5 by Charles Soule, Ron Wimberly

I'm cutting bait here.  Despite the build-up to the Blue File mystery that has slowly evolved over the past five issues, any interest I'd have in that file is extinguished by my total lack of interest in the characters.  This is a major disappointment, because I think the American zeitgeist is aligned for She-Hulk to really break out, and I had high hopes for Soule's run.

I'm not going to review scene-by-scene as in my other She-Hulk reviews.  The only comment I'll make on any specifics of the issue is Jennifer's encounter with Shocker.  I suspect Soule is trying to do something with Marvel villains and Jennifer's relationships with them.  Her first case involved the widow of a villain, her next client was Victor Von Doom's son, and now she's interacting with Shocker.  So when you think about it, there is great raw material in that!  How would a villain, or a family member of that villain, interact with their attorney?  And once that window is opened, how would Jennifer's thoughts about villains change?  Remember when she scolded the AIM bad guy for treating super heroes like trophies?  Does she already think that way about villains, or are her views evolving based on her interactions with her clients?

I'm not really sure Soule has any intention of exploring any of those questions.  If he does, it isn't apparent that he intends to answer any of those questions any time soon.  You can read my reviews, scene by scene, of issues 1-4 and see all the wasted opportunities I identified, and how not much has come of any of them.  If anything, we see inconsistency in Jennifer's character, or at best, unfounded or ambiguous evolution.

For example, consider at the end of issue 3 Jennifer vows to rescue Vernard.  Having made that vow, it's not clear why she immediately needed to consult fellow attorney Daredevil.  We're never privy to her internal struggles and the reasons she considers favoring inaction.  The setup seemed to be that Jennifer's internal struggle was whether to do something for her client or just leave him to his fate.  Somehow, Daredevil's consult inspired her to action.  But in the end, we get further inconsistency.  Apparently, Jennifer realized the way to achieve her client's true goal (get out from his father's yoke) was to open honest dialogue directly with his father.  But remember, Soule never clued us is in that Jennifer's struggle was with what to do, instead, we're only aware that she's struggling with whether to do anything.  There is a big difference between a character struggling with resignation versus a specific plan of action, and Soule fumbled it.  I.e., we don't know if Jennifer thought this was the best way to resolve the problem the instant Vernard told her why he's seeking asylum, and only rushed him to the courthouse due to time constraints.  Further, there's no connection between any of Daredevil's advice and Jennifer's strategy for resolving the situation.  So we really don't know if the end of issue 4 was dynamism in her character or not.  It's all a mess, and it's why at this point I don't care about Jennifer.

As for Wimberly's art in issue 5, frankly it does not bother me as much as other reviews I've read online.  Perhaps the style has a purpose that may take an issue or two for revelation.  Otherwise, I'd advise they get Pulido back.

Editorial Critique: She-Hulk #4 by Charles Soule, Javier Pulido

Overall Rating: 3/10 (Last Issue: 4)
With the disappointing conclusion of this first arc of Soule's run, I suspect like-minded readers with high hopes for this series are seriously considering cutting bait.  Soule's issues are filled with creative plot points and themes drawn from Jennifer's lawyer world.  Each issue has included well-done mad cap humor perfectly complimented by Pulido's cartoon art style.

But all four issues have fallen utterly flat in terms of dramatic elements and character development.  It's as if Soule and his editor think it enough to throw a bunch of clever ideas on a wall, and some will stick and keep reader interest.  It doesn't seem to occur to either of them to TELL A GREAT DRAMATIC STORY, and DEVELOP FACETED CHARACTERS READERS EMPATHIZE WITH.  As a result, the scripts have an unfinished and rushed feel.

Writing Technique: 8/10 (Last Issue: 8)
Soule continues with excellent economy and style.

Story Telling: 4/10 (Last Issue: 4)
The arc's resolution of the Doom family dispute is creative, but lacking in drama.

Characters: 2/10 (Last Issue: 3)
None of the characters go anywhere, and whatever Soule might have intended with the Daredevil consultation is fumbled badly.

Art: 7/10 (Last Issue: 8)
I hate downgrading Pulido from last issue, because as discussed below, there was nothing dramatic for him to portray.  That leaves us judging him solely on people talking and a few fight scenes with doom bots...hardly great story material to work from.  He did great with what he had.

Scene 1
Story
In Jennifer's law office, paralegal Huang tries to console Jennifer about Vernard's kidnapping and the fact that payment for Vernard's case was confiscated.  Still frustrated, Jennifer seeks out the advice of fellow attorney Matt Murdoch (aka Daredevil).  Daredevil relates a story where he was compelled to act extra-judiciously in order to achieve justice for his client.  She-Hulk and Daredevil go on a brief crime-fighting adventure, then say their goodbyes.

Commentary
This scene is utterly useless filler, accomplishing nothing to drive the plot or any character forward.  At the close of last issue, Jennifer already vowed to rescue Vernard...so why does she need a conference with Matt?  Does she have doubts about what she should do?  What are those doubts?

Put simply, there are no stakes, or anything else a conversation with Matt is supposed to resolve.  Even if we assume Jennifer is having doubts, we aren't told what they are.  Is she fearful of her own safety?  Is there something unethical about a lawyer rescuing a client like that?  Is it illegal?  The reader is totally confused as to why Jennifer, an experienced superhero, needs advice from Matt.  A very amateurish scene.

Scene 2
Story
Jennifer sneaks into Latervia, battles some doom bots, and is ultimately captured by a giant-sized bot controlled by Doom.  Jennifer assumes the role of family therapist, helping Doom understand his son's desire to chart his own future.  Vernard further explains his wishes to Doom, who agrees to take the matter under consideration.  Jennifer is released with token appreciation for her efforts acknowledged by the Doom men.

Commentary
Perhaps Soule intends commentary or praise here on lawyers who attempt to see beyond the disputing parties' stated goals, breaches the parties "defenses" and initiates dialogue and reconciliation between the parties instead of lengthy and destructive wars.  Or perhaps the scene is just cornball.  If the former was intended, there was no groundwork laid for it, it was too decompressed, and certainly no dramatic element to it.  I suspect the majority of readers will take it as cornball.

Scene 3
Story
Jennifer, Hellcat and Huang discuss the Blue File that Jennifer brought with her from her prior firm.  Huang is dispatched to retrieve records about the case, and Hellcat is sent to discuss the case with other parties to it.  The scene closes with Jennifer stating the file "feels important."

Commentary
Other than further exposition of the quirky office environment in which Jennifer's law practice finds itself, the scene is fairly straightforward in attempting to build suspense for the next issue and story arc.

Saturday, July 12, 2014

Editorial Critique: She-Hulk #3 by Charles Soule, Javier Pulido


Overall Rating: 4/10 (Last Issue: 6)
Jennifer's character continues to stagnate with glacial growth and unclear motivations.  Jennifer's latest client, Kristoff Vernard (son of Victor Von Doom), seems hastily developed as a character and despite the roller-coaster nature of his plot line, reader empathy for him is minimal.  Soule continues to produce great raw material for a compelling series, but seems to squander opportunities to develop and heighten drama.

Writing Technique: 8/10 (Last Issue: 8)
Continued demonstration of excellent clarity and economy.

Story Telling: 4/10 (Last Issue: 5)
Cause and effect still logical drives the plot, albeit with wacky comics hi-jinks license.  Character driven drama is minimal, thus the reduction in score from last issue.

Characters: 3/10 (Last Issue: 6)
Glaring failure to develop and expose Vernard's emotional stake in his asylum effort.  Jennifer's motivation to zealously help Vernard is vague, and she seems increasingly bland.  As discussed below, squandered opportunities to heighten character drama.

Art: 8/10 (Last Issue: 8)
Pulido continues to shine, capturing the plot's sense of urgency in the faces and body language of the characters.

Scene Analysis
Scene 0
Story
Jennifer directly addresses the reader with a recap of the prior issues events.

Commentary
It's a little early in the series to know whether we should be taking soliloquy as Jennifer's voice, or Soule's or a Marvel editor's.  Interestingly, as an aside Jennifer mentions Hellcat's emotional turmoil and that employing her might be providing some grounding.  This develops Jennifer's character somewhat, portraying her as both empathetic to people with "issues," and perhaps a bit maternal or sisterly.  

Scene 1
Story
Robots surround Jennifer (not green) and someone, presumably Vernard but wearing a hoody to hide his face.

Commentary
As foreshadowing, res ipsa loquitor.
Scene 2
Story
Jennifer conducts a client interview of Vernard in her office.  He explains she is his lawyer of last-resort, having been rejected by other firms out of fear of his father.  They continue their conversation out of the office to a coffee shop and stroll, ultimately returning to the office.  While on their stroll Vernard explains he is seeking asylum in the US because his father's grooming to be heir to the dictatorship makes him file like "puppet".

Commentary
The scene feels like its primary purpose is to introduce Vernard's character.  He comes off as an arrogant, spoiled playboy type, but with some thoughtfulness about his father's work.  That said, he doesn't reject his father's evilness per se, he only rejects his father's control over him personally.  Thus the character appears shallow.

The in-office setting features both Jennifer's paralegal Huang and her monkey Hei Hei taking notes of Jennifer's conversation.  The monkey's notes turn out to be scribbles, but are praised by Ms.Huang.  It's not entirely clear to me whether Soule is taking a clever jab at law office personnel by way of subtle analogy, or if the joke goes no further than the absurdity of a monkey taking notes and Ms. Huang's relationship with the monkey.

Scene 3
Story
After being informed by Doom in the last scene that he had arrived one year ago to the day in the US, Jennifer must rush him to the courthouse for an asylum hearing.  They are at first driven in Vernard's chauffeured car.  In transport Jennifer call a friendly judge for the favor of an immediate hearing, while Vernard on his cell phone calls a paramour to arrange a date, but is depicted leering at Jennifer.  Vernard's chauffeur turns out to be a doom bot and takes them to a small  airport with the intent of forcefully returning Vernard home on a small jet.  Jennifer defeats the doom bot, and borrows a Fantastic Four jet car that luckily is hangered at that airport.  Vernard advises the chauffeur bot probably arranged for more bots to inhibit their efforts to reach the courthouse, to which Jennifer reveals she already has a plan.

Commentary
The scene's action and plot are very simple, serving the purpose of developing a farcical cat-and-mouse game between Jennifer and Doom bots as she tries to get Doom to the courthouse.  Jennifer's character develops only slightly, as her friendly relationship with the judge (revealed by the tone of her call requesting an emergency hearing) continues the portrayal of Jennifer having "connections," and an ability to get things done through relationships she's built over time.  I suppose the scene also reveals Jennifer's stubborn persistence (but what super hero lacks that?).   It is not clear whether Doom's leering at Jennifer foreshadows some kind of relationship between the two, or is merely to amplify the lecherous playboy archetype.  Only this development of Vernard, if it ever materializes, saves the scene from feeling like filler.

Scene 4
Story
Tying back to Scene 1, Jennifer and a hooded person we initially assume to be Vernard, are on courthouse steps surrounded by Doom bots.  A fight ensues, revealing the hooded person was actually Hellcat acting as a decoy to allow Vernard to sneak into the courthouse.

Commentary
The decoy twist speaks for itself, economically well executed.  Jennifer's character develops by adding cleverness to the mix.  Hellcat's portrayal as a brawler continues.

Scene 5
Story
Jennifer rushes into the court room, a brief hearing is held and asylum granted.  Instantly Victor Von Doom crashes through the ceiling and absconds with his son.  Before leaving, a brief exchange is had between Von Doom, Vernard, and Jennifer.  Von Doom expresses his disappointment in his son, who acknowledges his father's sentiment and seems to resign himself to his fate.  Jennifer urges Vernard to resist, and vows to rescue him.

Commentary
The closing scene is perhaps the most dramatic thus far, but misses a few beats.  With excellent economy, the relationship between Doom and Vernard is portrayed, Vernard's resignation to his fate is revealed, as well and Jennifer's empathy and resolve for her client.  There does strike me as a bit of a hole in how quickly Vernard resigns to his fate.  He had, after all, somehow left Latervia in the first place, persisted after rejections by a dozen lawyers before finding Jenifer, seen Jennifer outwit the doom bots in the race to the courthouse, and just been granted immunity.  Why give up hope so easily now?  Also, the scene could have been even more powerful if the issue had built up the stakes in Vernard's hopes for asylum as a sort of finish line.  Even if he is the aloof sort, and always suspected his father would win out in the end, spiking his hopes somehow right before the finale might have made the scene more powerful, and his resignation all the more powerful.

Also, Jennifer's resolve to rescue him lacks a defined motivation that would help her character along.  Does she want to rescue him simply because she's a super hero and that's her job?  Unfortunately, that's what it seems like.  But if it was clearer that Jennifer really empathizes with his situation and really wants to see him live his own life from out of his father's shadow, wouldn't that make her resolve more powerful?  Or if maybe there had been some hint of attraction, i.e. the cliche lure of the bad boy?

But as it stands, the personal stakes aren't there.  Sure, there is the personal stake of a lawyer and her client, and the lead for next issue's title is "The Zealous Advocate," but that's hard to empathize with and at the end of the day, is just business.  Indeed, if the motivation is purely lawyer/client, Jennifer's last case undermines that "zealous advocate" aspect of her character, because she almost dropped that case but for a reminder that her client was a struggling widow with orphaned children.

So again, why should she care so much about Vernard?  Why should we?

Thursday, July 3, 2014

Editorial Critique: She-Hulk #2 by Charles Soule, Javier Pulido

Overall Rating: 6/10 (Last Issue: 5)
Soule does better here, finally giving Jennifer a hint of depth and vulnerability.  Paralegal Huang could evolve into a quirky side kick, and who knows what we'll see from Jennifer's friend Patsy/Hellcat.  Pulido is still, however, doing the heavy lifting of revealing Jennifer's character to the reader.

Writing Technique: 8/10 (Last Issue: 8)
Nothing new to say since the last issue: clean, economical, excellent.

Story Telling: 5/10 (Last Issue: 6)
Like last issue, everything is logical and conflict/resolution based with no holes.  But there is very little gravity or drama to any scene, with one possible exception.  Very much feels like pieces are being arranged for future use.

Characters: 6/10 (Last Issue: 3)
The last issue left much to be desired with Jennifer, leaving me totally uninterested in her (rated a 3).  This issue does better, where she finally reveals she feels as if her world is unraveling.  In my review of last issue I wrote that the conflict of successful She-Hulk vs. struggling Jennifer would be the key to anyone giving a damn about Jennifer.  Soule has opened that door a crack, and needs to kick it wide open lickety-split.

Art: 8/10 (Last Issue: 7)
Pulido seems to be carrying the weight of developing Jennifer's character on his shoulders, using facial expressions and body language to reveal her mind in ways Soule's script falls short.

Scene Analysis
Scene 1
Story:
Jennifer is now a solo lawyer, with one case she brought from her prior firm.  She is interrupted at her desk by her new office landlady, who gives her a tour of the building.  The other tenants also have various super powers.  Jennifer returns from the tour to find paralegal candidates waiting to interview in her office.  She steps out for coffee, and mysteriously all but one candidate has left, and the receptionist's hair is disheveled.  Jennifer interviews and hires the remaining candidate, a woman with a small pet monkey.  The woman, Ms. Huang, and her monkey start work immediately, but at the moment have nothing to do.

Commentary:
This scene is primarily world-building, foreshadowing other tenants' eventual entry into the story.  The absurdity surrounding the hiring of Ms. Huang, is interesting, but untethered.  When Jennifer asks Huang why the other candidates left and Huang says "My Guess?  They got scared," I'm unclear as to whether there's supposed to be mystery behind that line.  Is there any reason we're supposed to think they might have been scared by Huang herself?  Or is she clearly referring to Jennifer?  Obviously the former implicates something ominous about Huang, the latter merely suggests that as an intimidating green She-Hulk, Jennifer is going to have to take a "beggars can't be choosers" approach to her hiring.   The latter makes the most sense, because after all, why else hire a woman who brings a monkey into the office?

Scene 2
Story:
Jennifer pounds the phones trying to get referrals from colleagues, with no success.

Commentary:
Pulido's art carries the day.  The bottom of the page shows Jennifer's range of emotions, including anger, exasperation, desperation, and then finally exhaustion.  The colors darken as her mood worsens.  Simply brilliant!  But throughout the page, nothing in Soule's script compliments Pulido's art.

Scene 3
Story:
Jennifer leaves work at 4pm (to Huang's protest) to meet her friend Patsy (a.k.a. Hellcat) for drinks.  They commiserate, drink a lot, talk briefly, dance.  While talking over drinks, Jennifer reveals to Patsy that Jennifer has no savings, expressing her view that there's no sense in planning, and she just wants to do her best at everything.  Patsy reveals to Jennifer that she is bored and restless. The scene ends with a drunken Patsy leaving the night club to (presumably) go find some other excitement.

Commentary:
First, it's worth noting that in this scene Jennifer explicitly mentions she's a big girl with a high alcohol tolerance.  In the first book, I really had hoped Jennifer's heavy drinking was meant to reveal her inner doubts and insecurities about being a lawyer, having just burned her bridge to big time law firms.  But now it seems this is just a running gag about how She-Hulk can handle her booze, and speaks nothing to anything going on in her head.

Second, I'm not sure how to digest Jennifer's comment about not having any savings.  The problem is that we aren't told what she spends on.  Expensive baubles?  Vacations?  Charity?  I suppose not being a saver reveals something about her character, but it would be far more telling if we knew where the money went.  And why does she feel it necessary to tell Patsy, her long time friend, why she doesn't save?  If Jennifer really is a carpe diem kind of gal, wouldn't Patsy already know that?  On the other hand, another way to read the scene is that Jennifer was just about to vent some of her concerns about the financial situation to Patsy, who interrupted her mid-sentence.  Maybe Jennifer is a bit stressed out by everything after all?

Third, it's pretty clear the scene is setting up Patsy as a prop.  The rascal, trouble-making friend who always manages to drag the good guy into some misadventure.  Nothing wrong with a prop, but could have been a little more subtle.

Scene 4
Story:
She-Hulk and Helcat raid a warehouse containing a couple enemy agents in robot suits.  One of the enemy is really motivated to defeat She-Hulk and Helcat so he can advance within his organization's hierarchy.  When questioned whether her threat to kill both of the enemy is a bluff, She-Hulk warns the men that her life is falling apart and that she's capable of anything.  The look in She-Hulk's eyes causes the bad guys to surrender.  As they leave the warehouse Patsy accepts She-Hulk's offer to become an investigator for the firm.

Commentary:
Finally!  Soule gives Jennifer some dialogue to reveal that she is indeed struggling with recent events in her life.  Or did he?  After being tied up, the bad guy wonders whether it was all a bluff, and as readers we can't be sure either.

Also noteworthy is that Jennifer seems curious as to what makes the bad guys tick.  She's disgusted by it, but it will be interesting to see if Soule continues to use her as a window into the world of the bad guys.  Maybe riff on Marvel's Superior Foes of Spider-man, a series designed to comically show the bad guy's perspective.

Scene 5
Story:
Jennifer makes it to the office late the next morning.  The son of Victor Von Doom is waiting in her office, in need of a lawyer to get him assylum in the US.

Commentary:
Mostly just a cliffhanger, although Ms. Huang's assertiveness builds her character a bit.



Editorial Critique: She-Hulk #1 by Charles Soule, Javier Pulido

Overall Rating: 5/10
Soule fails to leverage his clever plot points to develop the main character.  So much opportunity to develop a compelling, textured, and sympathetic main character is simply wasted. The opening scene offered ideal groundwork to introduce She-Hulk as a successful, brash, bad-ass in "super hero life", to contrast with struggling, vulnerable and evolving Jennifer in "lawyer life."  So much character texture and story could be harvested out of that simple duality!

Instead, this first issue suggests that Soule, well-known by readers as a lawyer himself, merely intends to use Jennifer's "lawyer life" to drive plot.  In other words, Soule's Jennifer emerges as just a super hero with a day job.  What a waste.  I hope the next few issues prove me wrong.  Otherwise, readers will find the lawyer angle to be an interesting twist for a few issues, then quickly loose interest.

Writing Technique: 8/10 
The book is technically very well written.  Excellent economy.  For example, the courtroom scenes and legalese never need explaining.  Dialogue is tight.  Soule gives his audience credit for intelligence, indeed, the book is probably targeting older readers.

Story telling: 6/10 
The plot is conflict driven and moves along without any holes or inconsistencies in cause and effect.  Clever use of the legal system to drive plot and offer commentary.

Characters: 3/10 
Jennifer, the She-Hulk, is a simple, uninteresting character.  Pulido's art suggests the possibility of a personality, but the story and dialogue provide almost none.

Art 7/10:
The art is economical, the effect of which is to really give power and emphasis to the details Pulido chooses to include in the panel.   For example, the final scene shows a girlish Jennifer in a pair of sporty shorts, a hoody sweatshirt,  and hair in a long, careful braid. Indeed, the artwork's suggestions and hints at Jennifer's character only serve to emphasize the lack thereof in Soule's writing.    As "Jennifer", Pulido portrays a young, clean-cut professional with soft, girlish features.  As "She-Hulk",  Pulido goes with an athletic, sporty look--not the hulking, female-bodybuilder look.  Certainly not an over-sexualized female image, which is very smart.

Scene Analysis
Scene 1
Story:
She-Hulk reveals herself to be confident, perhaps even cocky, that her law firm's annual review will go well.  She meets with the senior partners (two white males), who reveal she was only hired in hopes her connections to wealthy superheroes.  She's told that her thousands of billed hours for the firm last year were appreciated, but that her efforts were fungible with every other of the firm's attorneys (i.e. she's nothing special), and she'll be receiving no special bonus.

Jennifer is angered by the partners' critique, but does not address substance of their criticism.  She first argues that she's saved the city many times as a super hero, implying the firm owes her something for that.  Next she claims she's a "fantastic" attorney, but doesn't explain why.  She then splits the large conference room table in two, resigning from the firm.

Commentary:
This opening scene leaves me confused about Jennifer's character.  Are her actions at the end of the scene driven by the strength of her character, or weakness?  That answer is important, isn't it?

One interpretation of the scene is as a "you go girl!" moment, with the under-appreciated female lead confronting the (presumably) unjust patriarchy.  Frankly, rather predictable for a female super-hero.  Also, the use of generic older white professional males as a villain device would be nauseatingly politically correct--and lazy.  

On the other hand, her actions could be viewed as a sort of tantrum, driven by insecurity and vulnerability in the face of honest criticism.  Think about it...a character with super strong physical strength, but vulnerable self-esteem and suppressed doubt when it comes to her non-hero professional life.  Now that's an interesting character!          

Well, which is it?  Let's stick a tack in this issue and return to it as the book progresses.

Scene 2
Story:
Jennifer is drinking at a bar frequented by attorneys.  The scene shows several panels of Jennifer having drinks alone, eventually just grabbing the bottle from behind the bar and helping herself.  A lady in the background is rebuffed by other attorneys and finally approaches Jennifer with her case.  It turns out she's the widow of an inventor allegedly screwed by billionaire Tony Stark (Iron Man).  Jennifer, friendly with Stark, thinks she can resolve the matter with a conversation instead of a law suit, and agrees to help the widow.

Commentary:
After this scene, my interest in Jennifer as a character is hanging by a thread.  This scene really could have cleared up the questions about Jennifer's character that are lingering from the first scene.  Instead, I'm beginning to suspect that Jennifer is as bland as a rice cake.

First, there's ambiguity in the heavy drinking.  Is she drinking heavily to drown her sorrows, insecurities and fears caused by the first scene's events?  Or is she unfazed by the day's events and the drinking scene is supposed to be a humorous powers-gag (the gag being that as a Hulk, she has a high tolerance and can really hold her liquor)?  I suppose the gag is indeed funny, but does nothing to build the character.

Then there's Jennifer's conversation with the widow.  We see Jennifer confidently accepting the case.  No lingering self-doubts from the day's earlier criticism.  Her only hesitation is that she doesn't specialize in patent law, but otherwise jumps right in.  No tie in to the day's earlier events.  For example, we don't know if she's eager to take the case in order to prove herself a good attorney and spite her critics.  We don't know if she's secretly doubting herself as an attorney.  We don't completely understand why she's taking the case at all.  Total dramatic disconnect from the previous scene.

Hey Soule!  You had your lead character in a bar...have her talk to someone (the bartender?!!) and let us know what's on her mind!  Otherwise, we're confused at best, and at worst we seem to be heading in the direction where Jennifer's self-esteem and ego are as bullet proof as her body.  In other words, a very uninteresting and unsympathetic character.

As a plot device, the law suit against Tony stark may have legs, let's see.

Scene 3
Story:
Jennifer visits Stark Tower in an attempt to meet with Tony Stark and hopefully resolve the widow's case.  The hologram receptionist diverts her instead to the company lawyer, who essentially gives Jennifer the runaround.  She leaves in disgust, promising to take the matter to court.

Commentary:
I take this scene as a sort of humorous, cynical commentary on the legal system by Soule.  Aside from that, we see Jennifer refusing to go toe-to-toe with the Stark corporate lawyer as he raises legal technicalities against the widow's suit.  It's not clear why this is.  Is it because his claims are valid and she's outmatched, yet she believes (perhaps naively) that justice will prevail?  Or is she really the better lawyer, and just refusing to stoop to his petty level?  The problem is, the motivation for her behavior is again ambiguous.  I realize the scene's purpose wasn't character building, but still...I'm still starving to understand who Jennifer is!

Scene 4
Story:
Jennifer and Stark's legal team square off in court for a preliminary hearing.  Stark's lawyers argue Jennifer shouldn't be involved due to past personal experiences with Stark.  Stark's lawyers seem to be employing a strategy of burying the other side in paper.

Commentary:
Like the last scene, the main purpose seems to be cynical humor directed at the legal system, but also setting the tone of the conflict.

Scene 5
Story:
Jennifer and the widow meet at a storage unit to rummage through the deceased husband's stuff in search of evidence to support the case.  Jennifer begins to suggest to the widow that the case is more involved than initially thought, and maybe Jennifer's involvement would be detrimental.  That conversation is interrupted by the widow's children, the sight of whom changes Jennifer's mind about leaving the case.  She eventually finds a tape that she thinks is a smoking gun, although we aren't told yet what's on it.

Commentary:
So were Jennifer's second thoughts about the case based on self doubt (tracing back to the first scene)?  Are we being shown a real, vulnerable person?  Is there a sympathetic person in that green skin, finally?

Or instead, is she just voicing legitimate concerns that as a sole practitioner the case was simply beyond her professional scope?  Or that the potential conflicts of interest raised by Stark's lawyers were legitimate?

Was the whole point of the scene not to expose a weakness in Jennifer's self-confidence, or merely a sappy opportunity to portray Jennifer as a champion of widows and orphans?  Should I still be guessing at this point!?

Scene 6
Story:
Jennifer goes to Stark Tower to confront Stark with her evidence that indeed one of Tony's companies stole an idea from the widow's husband.  She has to fight robots to reach Tony's office.  She explains the situation to Tony and he's agreeable to a settlement.  She dismisses his flirting, but seems to appreciate it.

Commentary:
To the extent the widow's case drove the book's conflict, this scene resolved it.  The scene's purpose may have not been intended to be much else.

However, it is interesting to note that in the opening scene, the law firm partners had expected Jennifer to use her personal relationships with people like Tony Stark for business and profit.  In that opening scene she mentioned that those relationships were "sacred" to her, presumably meaning she wouldn't exploit them for personal gain.  Yet she didn't hesitate to use her personal relationship with Stark to resolve the case for the benefit of the widow and orphan.  Ok, great, she's got a code.  But it's predictable superhero behavior.  To the extent a personal connection is like a power, she uses it only for good and not personal gain. At best, a new twist a classic super hero beat.

Scene 7
Story:
Jennifer is back at the lawyers bar, drinking again.  The widow comes in and offers Jennifer $150,000 for her efforts, which she at first refuses but reluctantly accepts and suggests she has plans for it.

Commentary:
I'm inclined to think Soule doesn't intend for us to read too much into Jennifer's acceptance of the money.  We can imagine that in a case against Tony Stark, that $150,000 was probably a small portion of the widow's award (she does tell Jennifer the total award "changed our lives") and is supposed to be a reasonable fee under the circumstances.  Sure, she did say in the opening scene that her relationships were "sacred," but after all she's out of a job.  Maybe Soule is raising a moral question for a super-hero to get paid for her efforts, but I think that's an over-analysis of the scene.  Indeed, Jennifer says she has plans for the money and presumably those plans are noble.

Artistically, in this scene she's portrayed in a sweat suit instead of business attire...which seems to be shorthand for her being unemployed.  But still, despite the sweat suit, I'm not sure if the drinking portrayed is to drown sorrows or just continuing the "Hulks can handle their booze!" gag.  One interpretation would make me care about this character, the other is funny but not compelling.

Scene 8
Story:
Jennifer is shown using the money to start her own small law office.

Commentary:
The scene resolves why Jennifer took the money.  Character-wise, it shows her independent side, starting her own firm instead of seeking out employment at a new firm.  Artistically, Pulido puts a casual, girlish touch on Jennifer.  Together, the art and story do more for Jennifer's character than any other scene in the book, but it's not much, and maybe too little too late.