J M DeMatteis: Classic Or Dud

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Classic....? Dud....? Two sides of ONE coin.

Om.

― Tom (Groke), Tuesday, 14 September 2004 12:08 (twenty-one years ago)

Some decent issues of Defenders despite being a dud who scaled the mystical mountains of mediocrity to perfect the technique of his dudness with a dud guru. I sometimes pictured him writing with both hands at once, the way Da Vinci did -- a comic script with the right hand, some New Age pamphlet with the other, no one noticing when he got them mixed up.

Didn't he actually change/retcon/whatever the way some of the Dr Strange cosmology worked, to make it more compatible with his beliefs? Or was that a wild rumor?

― Tep (ktepi), Tuesday, 14 September 2004 12:27 (twenty-one years ago)

I have a very strong mental image of how JM DeMatteis looks.

I have just realised that this very strong mental image is based entirely on Dr Druid.

― Tom (Groke), Tuesday, 14 September 2004 12:30 (twenty-one years ago)

The only stuff I've read of his is a couple of issues of Seekers into the Mystery (if that's what it was called) which seemed like plotless new-age wank.

― Wooden (Wooden), Tuesday, 14 September 2004 12:31 (twenty-one years ago)

HAHAHA I had forgotten Seekers: Into The Mystery.

Oh dear me, Vertigo, oh dear.

― Tom (Groke), Tuesday, 14 September 2004 12:32 (twenty-one years ago)

Wasn't some soul-search wank by JM one of the first one-shots published by Vertigo? Though not as bad as Seekers, which more or less degenerated into publishing the phone number of his guru, in case readers have further questions. Next month: a cut-out-and-keep persnality quiz!

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Tuesday, 14 September 2004 13:31 (twenty-one years ago)

In contrast: Brooklyn Dreams, a miniseries originally published in quite small format (like the Lone Wolf & Cubs, only much thinner) has recently beeen collected, and is probably the best version of that one story that he keeps retelling.

What thinks ILC of The JMDM Book: Moonshadow? I enjoyed it at the time, though it annoyed me in a way that I didn't yet have a word for: tweeness.

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Tuesday, 14 September 2004 13:39 (twenty-one years ago)

On the merits on JLI: Classic.
Other stuff: sometimes.

― Huk-L, Tuesday, 14 September 2004 13:40 (twenty-one years ago)

Moonshadow is beautifully illustrated. And let's wrap it up there, shall we?

― Matt Maxwell (Matt M.), Tuesday, 14 September 2004 13:43 (twenty-one years ago)

That's all I actually remember of it, the nice art. Ditto for Blood, the story of which I remember poorly enough that I don't know if it's related to the anime of the same name.

Did he do Havoc and Wolverine, or did that just have similar art to Blood? Wolverine's hair was all ... swooshy.

― Tep (ktepi), Tuesday, 14 September 2004 15:53 (twenty-one years ago)

Jon J Muth & Kent Williams did _Havok & Wolverine_ (spell the mutie's name right, yo!) - JJM drew all the Havok bits, Kent Williams drew all the Wolverine bits. It looked purty, but I can't remember much of the story except for some half-life radiation poisoning stuff. Also, I believe LOUISE SIMONSON wrote the mini.

― David R. (popshots75`), Tuesday, 14 September 2004 16:36 (twenty-one years ago)

& chess metaphors. Lots of chess metaphors. Also, hot JJM gurl making googly eyes w/ Havok.

― David R. (popshots75`), Tuesday, 14 September 2004 16:36 (twenty-one years ago)

Muth! There we go. And Kent Williams illustrated Blood, says Google and Amazon, so my confusion makes some kind of weird sense.

Don't forget the swooshy hair. I can't get it out of my head.

― Tep (ktepi), Tuesday, 14 September 2004 16:44 (twenty-one years ago)

Muth and Kevin Nowlan did the art for Moonshadow. Funny, but I was thinking it was Muth and Williams, too.

Havok and Wolverine: Meltdown was pretty, but nothing substantial. Which seems to be the curse of a lot of John Muth's/Kent Williams' projects.

― Matt Maxwell (Matt M.), Tuesday, 14 September 2004 23:07 (twenty-one years ago)

relelentlessy dud...although i have vague memories of maybe a forever people mini that was alright???

― gaz (gaz), Wednesday, 15 September 2004 00:12 (twenty-one years ago)

One of my most disliked comic writers ever.

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Wednesday, 15 September 2004 20:52 (twenty-one years ago)

why on earth does he keep getting work?

― gaz (gaz), Thursday, 16 September 2004 04:08 (twenty-one years ago)

Dr Fate was... good, I thought.

― Chuck Tatum (Chuck Tatum), Monday, 20 September 2004 14:48 (twenty-one years ago)

three years pass...

OTM me.

― Chuck_Tatum, Friday, 13 June 2008 18:52 (seventeen years ago)

Although has he done anything at all worth reading in the past... 15 years?

― Chuck_Tatum, Friday, 13 June 2008 19:05 (seventeen years ago)

I don't think I've read anything he's done in the past 15 years. I dug him when I was in my teens, though. His Spectacular Spider-Man run was good stuff. Ditto Dr. Fate. As long as he avoids the spirtual wankery (which he can't for long, it would seem), or when he's paired with Giffen, he's usually fairly solid.

― Deric W. Haircare, Friday, 13 June 2008 19:18 (seventeen years ago)

Brooklyn Dreams was pretty good. And he did a nifty version of The Parable of the Stonecutter," but I don't know how much credit he deserves for that.

― Oilyrags, Friday, 13 June 2008 19:18 (seventeen years ago)

His Spectacular Spider-Man run was good stuff.

I believe this as much as I believe that Johns on Action Comics is good.

― David R., Friday, 13 June 2008 19:33 (seventeen years ago)

It is! Never been collected though. And one of the Bucsemas on art. Solid.

― Chuck_Tatum, Friday, 13 June 2008 19:47 (seventeen years ago)

His run on CAPTAIN AMERICA is OK - Mike Zeck makes most ppl look gd, tho (see also their Kraven the Hunter Spidey story) - in the same way that the issues of the Defenders written by DeMatteis and drawn (HORRIBLY) by Don Perlin are utterly dreadful

― Ward Fowler, Friday, 13 June 2008 20:18 (seventeen years ago)

x-post

Sal Buscema on art. Most of the DeMatteis run on Spectacular involved the slow re-emergence of Harry Osborn's insanity. It's a good, psychologically tense run. And I really like Buscema's storytelling (lots of nine-panel pages with slight changes from panel to panel).

― Deric W. Haircare, Friday, 13 June 2008 20:26 (seventeen years ago)

I believe this as much as I believe that Johns on Action Comics is good.

Stick to your guns, it's no good. The Buscema art was nice, though.

― The Yellow Kid, Friday, 13 June 2008 21:17 (seventeen years ago)

I liked some of his books back in the 80s. Moonshadow was definitely a unique comic for its time, but I have not read it since the 80s. The only place I have seen his name on a new book since I started reading comics again is on one of those Wildstorm team books.

I have re-read the first few issues of the 80s Justice League book and they held up as still being fun.

I'm not sure where his 80s run on Captain America started or stopped, but there was a long time that book was pretty good starting with Stern/Byrne, Zeck, Paul Neary and then later Mark Gruenwald writing the book. I'm not sure if DeMatteis was the only writer the whole time between Stern and Gruenwald, but I remember it being a pretty good book.

― earlnash, Wednesday, 25 June 2008 02:38 (seventeen years ago)

I have not read his Spectre series (shocking!), the one where Hal Jordan is the Green Ghost and, um, I dunno, the covers look kinda rad, and Norm Breyfogle art, but, um...

― Dr. Superman, Wednesday, 25 June 2008 04:16 (seventeen years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.