Latest posts for the thread "Nice review of Damnation Crusade from someone who never heard of 40k"

Nice review of Damnation Crusade from someone who never heard of 40k

Kid_Kyoto — GMT

http://goodcomics.comicbookresources.com/2007/10/12/fridays-wall-to-wall-violence/#more-10789

Ah my two great time sucks come together... Comic Book Resources tries to review a 40k comic.

"The plot, and I’m using the term loosely, follows three different members of the Black Templar division, or brigade, or whatever: Raclaw, an unwilling recruit, Gerhardt, a more experienced soldier, and Tankred, a sort of immortal cyborg robot thing."

"We alternate between the three as they fight nasty alien hordes. For six issues. And that’s it. Nothing is ever really explained — we see Raclaw go from barbarian to Templar, we see some perfunctory training scenes (mostly an excuse for more fights) but at no point is it made clear why Raclaw goes along. Does he actually believe in the cause? Was he brainwashed? No clue, because we’re not even told what the cause is. Just more blather about how devoted the Templars are. “Devoted to WHAT?” was what I kept asking. But all I got was another horde, another defiant roar, and ensuing mayhem."

Finally the reviewer gives up and gives the books to one his students and gets this review:

"Damnation Crusade Review

If you’re a Warhammer 40,000 fan, this comic book is for you. If not, I would not recommend reading this comic. It is full of action and dialogue but the story is hard to follow. There is also no real “main character” in this comic. It’s sheer violence to the core. The reason 40K fans will like this book is because only they will understand the reason behind all the violence. The art is pretty good as well.

Andrew H. (age 12)"

All in all a nice look at our crazy game from the outside.

RE: Nice review of Damnation Crusade from someone who never heard of 40k

Kilkrazy — GMT

What would you get if you decontructed the 40K canon from a post-modernist perspective?

"Come and have a go, Jacques Derrida, if you think you're hard enough!"

RE: Nice review of Damnation Crusade from someone who never heard of 40k

Symbio Joe — GMT

What strikes me a bit was this comment. After the review of Andrew.

Even the hardcore Warhammer fan thought the plot was on the thin side and the storytelling was hard to follow.

Could a 12 year old be a "hardcore" Warhammer fan?

RE: Nice review of Damnation Crusade from someone who never heard of 40k

Kilkrazy — GMT

Yes, definitely!

10-15 year old boys are the core target market for 40K.

RE: Nice review of Damnation Crusade from someone who never heard of 40k

inquisitor_bob — GMT

It's hard to believe a 12 year old wrote this. The sentences are too well constructed for the net-speak generation.

RE: Nice review of Damnation Crusade from someone who never heard of 40k

Pariah Press — GMT

Heh, and THAT'S why I don't read Warhammer comics. Seeing that cover of Scott McCloud's Destroy!! sure brings back a few things, though. I should try to track down a copy.

RE: Nice review of Damnation Crusade from someone who never heard of 40k

Elusive71 — GMT

I miss Marshal Law.

RE: Nice review of Damnation Crusade from someone who never heard of 40k

ShumaGorath — GMT

Its a crappy comic if you don't know all the back story (and technically bad even if you do). The art is poor the story is impossible to follow and doesnt seem to actually flow at all, and the story has no actual main character. Its a series of random and semi interesting events with little connectivity and poor artwork backing it up.

I liked it but the only one worth the cost was the issue that had 3 small stories in side of it. Which should say something.

RE: Nice review of Damnation Crusade from someone who never heard of 40k

MadEdric — GMT

Just bought the collected TPB and found it a good read. It's easier to understand when you read it all in one sitting than parceled out over several months. Of course I feel this way about all comics so usually wait for the TPB of the titles I like.
There's no real confusion in it, each of the three stories are easy to identify.
The art is fine, standard comic fair. Which means it falls short of the art I usually expect from GW.

In all a good book, not as good as say the Ephrael Stern series, which is my favorite.

The kid doing the review has the comprehension of a 12yo and misses much. He states you never know why these guys are fighting, it's stated again and again they fight for the Emperor. Sure if you know nothing about 40k you don't make the connection "The Emperor of Mankind", but you at least know there is an Emperor and these guys fight for him. You also know that these guys constantly fight the Xenos and Chaos traitors, letting you know that the galaxy is not a nice place.
In the end it ties it up nicely, letting you know how the three stories are related, and it actually caught me by surprise.

RE: Nice review of Damnation Crusade from someone who never heard of 40k

tegeus-Cromis — GMT

He states you never know why these guys are fighting, it's stated again and again they fight for the Emperor. Sure if you know nothing about 40k you don't make the connection "The Emperor of Mankind", but you at least know there is an Emperor and these guys fight for him.

And this tells us "why they fight" how exactly?

"Why did you shoot that old woman?"

"I did it for Zarg."

"Oh, that explains everything."

Regardless of the age of the person who made it, the comment is fair.

You also know that these guys constantly fight the Xenos and Chaos traitors, letting you know that the galaxy is not a nice place.

Oh come on. "These guys have this king and they do a lot of fighting for him, like, all the time" does not a backstory make. I haven't read the comic in question, but I am not at all surprised to hear that it would be meaningless to the uninitiated, and your defence does not give me reason to believe otherwise.

RE: Nice review of Damnation Crusade from someone who never heard of 40k

MadEdric — GMT

Wow.. pretty snarky for someone who hasn't read the comic. Just a general dislike for anything GW does or just a bad day?

Being a 40k player makes the comic easier to understand, I believe I said that. I'm pointing out that enough was said in the comic that you can understand why the Templars fight. Do you have a full background history on the Imperium? No, but as a reader yo need to fill in a few spots always.
1: These guys are warrior brethren of the Black Templars.
2: They fight for the glory of the Emperor.
3: They defend humanity.
4: The chapters of the story usually revolve around many battles and campaigns the Templars have fought in.
5: There is always war.
This info, repeated several times each in the comic is enough for most people to gain understanding of what the story is about.
It weaves between three storylines, perhaps this is hard to understand for some, but after a few pages you can easily pick up the flow.
Perhaps I'm one of the few people remaining that can accept I need to actually think while reading so as to connect the dots to see the greater picture.
As I stated before, it's a good read, not a great one.
I guess my response is about accepting a review by a 12yo who knows nothing about 40k as an accurate one.
If you're 12 and know nothing about 40k, you probably won't like it.
Me, I'm an adult and play 40k. I'm also a comic collector and am pretty critical about both story and art in the medium. This comic passed both criteria for me.

RE: Nice review of Damnation Crusade from someone who never heard of 40k

tegeus-Cromis — GMT

Wow.. pretty snarky for someone who hasn't read the comic. Just a general dislike for anything GW does or just a bad day?

Neither, just an intimate acquaintance with niche interests and an awareness of how they appear to outsiders.

Oh, and an abiding dislike of fatuous arguments.

Being a 40k player makes the comic easier to understand, I believe I said that. I'm pointing out that enough was said in the comic that you can understand why the Templars fight. Do you have a full background history on the Imperium? No, but as a reader yo need to fill in a few spots always.
1: These guys are warrior brethren of the Black Templars.
2: They fight for the glory of the Emperor.
3: They defend humanity.
4: The chapters of the story usually revolve around many battles and campaigns the Templars have fought in.
5: There is always war.
This info, repeated several times each in the comic is enough for most people to gain understanding of what the story is about.

Well, it's certainly enough for them to understand 1 through 5, but that's hardly "understanding why they fight."

1: So what exactly are the BT?
2: Who is this Emperor?
3: How did humanity come to be in such peril?
4: Meh.
5: Meh.

The knowledge you speak of boils down to the fact that these guys are dead 'ard warriors who fight to defend humanity and for this ruler who they like a whole lot. Do you really expect an outsider to be satisfied with that?

It weaves between three storylines, perhaps this is hard to understand for some, but after a few pages you can easily pick up the flow.
Perhaps I'm one of the few people remaining that can accept I need to actually think while reading so as to connect the dots to see the greater picture.

Gimme a break. It's no Mulholland Drive, surely.

I guess my response is about accepting a review by a 12yo who knows nothing about 40k as an accurate one.

Bizarre terminology. "Accurate review"? This is a meaningless phrase; it assumes that a totalising critical opinion is possible.