The Virgin Read: "On Slaughterbit! On Swamptooth! On Donner! On Blitzen!" On and on and on and on….

Thor: Reign of Blood # 1
Written by Matt Fraction
Art by Khari Evans, Victor Olazaba, Patrick Zircher, June Chung & Matt Milla
Published by Marvel Comics

Okay, so why did I choose this comic?  Of all the options this week, many I'd read previously.  And, well, I thought this might enjoyable to review, if not exactly enjoyable to read.  Just like my experience with Marvel's Picture of Dorian Gray experience.  Seeing/reading something that I'm familiar with in an unfamiliar form – and then figuring out if I like it or not.

However, honestly, the most familiarity I have with Thor is from Adventures in Babysitting.  If he ever showed up in Clash of the Titans, then I might know him from that as well….but the only thing I really remember about that movie is Medusa and her snake hair.

I also figured this would be good choice because it's a "Marvel One Shot."  Which I thought was a done-in-one--but I guess it is not because on the last page it says "to be continued in Thor: Man of War."  So although it's only one book, its certainly not done in one.  And, in fact, this "one" has a part one AND a part two within it.  So, it took  a little more of a time commitment from me than I was expecting.  (Yeah, it's only a few more minutes….but still!)

Um, ya know, I think this is clearly one of those cases where, if you like "this sort of thing" than you'll like it.  And if this is not your cup o' tea, than, well, you won't. 

What do I mean by that?  Well, if  you like mythology (and all that includes), and if you like(d) the art in Illustrated Bible Stories, and if you like to read heightened or somewhat Shakespearean language – this is for you. 

Right off I could clearly say that what I didn't enjoy about this comic really has nothing to do with the comic book.  It's more about how myths are written.  They seem to have a formula that frustrates me the same way that Three's Company always frustrated me as a child.  You know, you just knew things in the story were going to go wrong, and then go even wronger before John Ritter got everything figured out.  In the meantime, you'd have to endure a lot of stupidity.

It seems to me that this comic, as with myths, the format goes like this: there's a set up, a climax, a twist, and then a conclusion that is also a new beginning that involves the former twist.  And so, I suppose, this is the method to connect all myths so that they go on.  And on.  And ON.  Which is what this comic book did. 

But there were really clever moments of dialogue, I thought.  Here are just a few of my faves:

 "It. Was. Rhetorical. You condescending ass." 

"I have hated her since before mud had a name."

"Fine and feh, to you.  Some daughter."

You might notice that those quotes are all from Part One.  Part Two didn't groove me as much.  Neither did the art of Part Two.  Again, not because there's really anything wrong with it.  If this is your kind of thing, I'm sure it's great.  For me, it was page after page of red and blood and bones and….rain?  Or is that blood raining down?  Anyhow, that much red is, well, too much red for me.  The Enchantress is drawn beautifully.  Or, at least is drawn to look beautiful.  Not a crazy disproportionate beauty….just Amazonian, god-like beauty.  Enviable even!

But all of Part One, I enjoyed the art.  The snow and ice.  The frosty witch.  Young Odin, old Odin, thor.  All great. 

So, I think if this book was simply a book of Part One, I would have totally enjoyed it.  And yes, I'm the girl who loves Tales From Ovid, and social history and "period pieces", etc.  So, I kinda dug this.  But some others in the TFO office, they probably won't.

And with that, my sweets, I bid you, farewell.

-Nina Stone, 2008

Comments

[Matthew J. Brady]

And actually, this one-shot was continued from a previous one-shot, making the whole term pretty much meaningless.

[Pedro Tejeda]

The solicitation at the end really felt more like something to let readers know that another story would follow if they liked the current one.

The two issue themselves have been quite stand alone. There are some things running through them that connect them for a reader and give them a better idea of what's going on, but this is like saying you need to see rush hour 1,2,and 3 to really understand what's going on in rush hour 1.

[Bored Lyron]

After reading the first one-shot, (I'm under the impression this was one-shot to hell) my local comic vendor mentioned this issue as being another in a similar vein. It was actually a continuation of the same frost-giant theme, but with an incongruous slaying at the middle (no pun int). The writing was off on this one, I think due to the 2 part set-up, which made the jumps in plot seem abrupt. With all the flowery dialogue and narrative exposition, you wouldn't think the frost-gal would be cleaved in two just to set up a necklace for the Enchantress. Did they use her icy remains later for shrimp cocktails? The eventual Thorrish freak-out also seemed a little too ham-fisted. More devious Lokian tricksterism would have been better for giving rationale for the dread reckoning against our human forebears. Most of the characters in this one lacked motivation for their actions. I mean, how hard is it to get some more Goofclaws and Grimfarts? The Norsemen eat horses don't they? My mama said.

[Tucker Stone]

I'm glad she picked this comic to review, because even though this was topsy-turvy hyperbole on the weak this week, I couldn't even have faked liking this thing. I didn't know what she was going to say until it went up, but I feel like that sentence "if this is your thing, you'll like it, if not, you won't" is directed right at me. Because this shit?

Really not my fucking thing.

[Garrett Martin]

The less you know about mythological Thor, the better off you are with Marvel Thor. Hillary was only familiar with the former, and thus couldn't get into this comic at all, although that has at least as much to do with the book's intermittent shittitude.