Remember when Dan DiDio proclaimed that, after Blackest Night, there wasn't going to be anymore "revolving door" with the death of characters? Here's the quote:Following Blackest Night, I think that death is a trick we will not be using very often – or at all for a long, long time. There is a finality of what goes on in Blackest Night, and there is an explanation of the “revolving door” sense of death in the DCU that’s part of the Blackest Night storyline.
And you guys actually believed him???
Suckers...
Yeah, James Robinson, who casually and offhandedly killed the Tasmanian Devil offscreen during Justice League: Cry For Justice--merely to show what a badass Prometheus was--has gone straight for the "trick" of death, and used the "revolving door" to undo that death.So the "finality" of what went on in Blackest Night didn't even last a year. Death, used as a cheap and lame story device, with an equally cheap resurrection making it "all better," apparently is back on the table at DC.
Tas was revived with the help of Rex The Wonder Dog and a Lazarus Pit (which is also the Fountain Of Youth---please don't ask), which might have won some awesome points...except my mouth is still tainted by the bitter aftertaste of Robinson having Tas killed, skinned, and turned into a rug for some immature shock effect.
I suppose that, given the fan outcry over Tas' unnecessary death, this could be seen as some form of half-assed apology from James Robinson, maybe a way to try to undo some of the damage to his reputation after the pillorying JL:CFJ took.
But Lian Harper is still dead, so no sale.
8 comments:
This was a completely ridiculous issue...but I have to admit that I enjoyed it, nevertheless. Possibly because it was just a bit on the insane side. And it did bring Taz back, so that's a good thing...right? Now if they would just stop killing off heroes in the FIRST place, I would be so happy.
I make the same point in my wrap-up this week (posted tomorrow) about Tas probably being the first one to come back from the dead following Blackest Night.
But, like Sally (who really should join in the Friday Night Fights) I still mostly enjoyed the one-shot.
Please reread the issue. Taz was NOT dead, he was skinned alive and the rest of him was kept alive in a stasis pod... thing.
Best,
Brett
Sorry, Brett, but at the very least I call retcon.
JL:CFJ #3 shows Taz being sliced in half by Prometheus and there's no mention of him being skinned alive. In the Starman/Congorilla issue, Malavar says Taz was imprisoned near him but in JL:CFJ #3 again we can clearly see Malavar in Prometheus's lab . . . and no sign of Taz.
He was dead, now he's not.
Rex the Wonder Dog is the Jesus Christ of the DC Universe.
Brett, doesn't that make things WORSE. Why do that to a character?
Brett--I might not be the only one who should re-read.
At no point does Malavar say that Tas was alive when he went into the pit, and in fact, he says he put "his body" into the water to "bring him back", not "him" into the water to "heal," as you would expect if Tas were indeed still alive.
Furthermore, Sirocco referred to Tas' "stasis pod thing" as a "vat of human remains," which sure suggests that Malavar was transporting a preserved corpse. Or else Sirocco is immensely stupid.
As Gary pointed out, there is no possible way to read the events of JL:CFJ as leaving Tas alive; Prometheus refers to Tas as "one of the Global Guardians I mentioned earlier," while in the previous panel Prometheus boasted of killing the Global Guardians. Unless, of course, Prometheus was lying to himself (IQ was mindless by this time).
Every single review I've seen--every single one--believes Taz died in JL:CFJ and was brought back to life here, so maybe the fault isn't in those reading but those writing. Hey, if James Robinson wants to wave his magic wand and undo all the gratuitous deaths from JL:CFJ, more power to him...but maybe he should try rewriting the issue so his cheats are more clearly expressed.
I'll take 'a half-assed apology' with a grin, as the death was crappy, and this book was fun. And DiDio did say 'not be using very often – or at all for a long, long time'.
Post a Comment