Current Reviews

subheader

Captain America #22

Posted: Monday, October 2, 2006
By: Diana Kingston



Writer: Ed Brubaker
Artist: Mike Perkins

Publisher: Marvel Comics


I'm just going to come right out and say it: I don't like Civil War. At all. I do not like it in a box, I do not like it under rocks, I do not like it here or there... well, you get the picture. The whole event just reeks of "Eau de Cash Grab," a clunky and ill-conceived mess both creatively and editorially. So I'm less than pleased when superior series such as Captain America get compromised by an A-plot born of the alcoholic fumes in Mark Millar's brain (because, as Barney Gumble can tell you, "Clone
Thor" only manifests after copious amounts of Duff Beer).

This issue's cover is a very good indicator of its content: 50% consists of nothing more than a big block of red ink, with "Civil War" occupying an otherwise-vacant space. And that's exactly what we get - half a continuation of Brubaker's character arcs/subplots, and half a long-winded diatribe about the pros and cons of registration. Maybe Marvel thinks that if they repeat the same arguments across sixty comics, they'll be able to convince people this is a debate as opposed to a pair of slogans being hurled back and forth by the same people.

In fairness, Brubaker does manage to write the most sensible version of Captain America since this whole booze-induced dementia started, but there's a lack of transition due to the fact that Civil War has nothing to do with what's been going on in this book. Last issue we had Captain America defeating the Red Skull's robot in Britain; a month later, the protagonist of the book is out of the picture and we're playing catch-up with Sharon Carter, while every other subplot is either put on hold or shoehorned in (i.e. the last two pages). There's no build-up, no context, no reason to care
about this situation at all unless you're already reading Civil War.

It's a mess, and the only reason I'm giving it is because
Brubaker's writing remains as strong and consistent as ever. But that's divorced from the fact that we've gone ridiculously off-course.



What did you think of this book?
Have your say at the Line of Fire Forum!