Funnybook Babylon

December 27, 2009

FBBP #121 – Luke Cage Noir

Filed under: Podcasts — Tags: , , , , , , — Chris Eckert @ 12:33 pm

The holidays were hectic around FBB Headquarters, as you may have inferred from our posting schedule. But we managed to record one last podcast for 2009 that takes a look at Luke Cage Noir, the latest in Marvel’s dusky crime-inspired Elseworlds series. We also tackle a frequently asked question regarding a beloved creator-owned series and the terrible things Chris says about it.

Do you want to know why we say such terrible things about something? Do you have questions and issues about Comics in 2010? Write us at the link on the sidebar, or call 347-AUNT-MAY and let us know!


  1. OMG, dude, how can you not like The Walking Dead? This is bullshit, I’m not listening to this podcast anymore.

    Srsly, though, I’m a big fan, but I can certainly agree with some of the arguments used. I do agree that Kirkman seems more concerned with milestones than storytelling, and that’s a big concern for me. But still, I find it highly enjoyable. I don’t care for his other Image stuff, though, and I’m certainly not going near Image United.

    I did really like Luge Cage Noir, I’m actually a fan of the Noir series, Spiderman particularly. I think it was a great pitch by Marvel.

    And Red Son is brilliant, LEAVE MARK MILLAR ALONE, YOU BULLIES.

    Hope you all have a great 2010 :-)

    Comment by euthanatos — December 28, 2009 @ 2:11 pm

  2. The critique on Kirkman was good, but I did disagree on the point of the murderous kid going crazy out of nowhere. I took the whole point of his murders to be that a child growing up in zombie world is going to have a skewed view on the concept of death and dying.

    Comment by Joe — December 28, 2009 @ 11:36 pm

  3. I had a really similar Walking Dead experience to Chris, even though it kept my interest for longer. I read most of it in a short period of time, and then when I caught up in single issues I also started reading the letter columns. The letter columns really do make Kirkman sound horrible.

    One of the best aspects of these types of creator-owned works is that readers know they’ll be getting a complete story with a beginning, middle, and end. Like them or not, works like Y: The Last Man, Preacher, and 100 Bullets all work this way. For some reason, Kirkman is treating his creator-owned work like a corporate super-hero story, with a third act that’s never going to happen. It was only recently that I gave up on the series, when the DC scientist was revealed to be lying, and I read in one of his letter columns that he had things planned out at least through the mid 200s with no end in sight. Up until that point, I thought we were on track to start wrapping up the story, with maybe another two or three years worth of material. Turns out I was way off. I still think individual issues are entertaining, but his big-picture plans for the series have really turned me off.

    Comment by benk — December 30, 2009 @ 1:30 pm

  4. Is there any successful long-form (200+) that didn’t make the creator go crazy (i.e. Dave Sim) or just burn the logic of the series with incalculable coincidences and tragedies (i.e. Terry Moore’s Strangers in Paradise)? The only one that really springs to mind is Bone, but I haven’t read that in a while so I’m not sure if it does go off the rails somewhere in the middle act. I think this is why I enjoy the Luna Brothers, if only because they choose one theme and create a whole world around that theme to explore. No need to have the same characters crop up forever. Just start up a whole new continuity with a new genre when the old one gets old.

    Still, I would like to think that Superheroes aren’t the only long-form universe-building genre in western comics that is sustainable for 200+ issues.

    Comment by gary — January 3, 2010 @ 12:10 pm

  5. I’m surprised that Chris stuck with The Walking Dead for as long as he did. I stopped reading it after the third trade, and I’m still clueless as to why it receives so much praise.

    As for the question that I e-mailed in about “Marvel Time”, I guess you can reduce it to this:

    Do you have any problem with the fact that no Marvel characters have been allowed to age since the mid-to-late-’70s?

    Two examples of what I’m talking about:

    Peter Parker aged up until then from a high school student to a college grad, but he’s hardly aged since.

    Franklin Richards aged up until then from a newborn to a 5-year-old, but he hasn’t aged at all since.

    Comment by Rand — January 18, 2010 @ 5:55 pm

  6. Hardly is true in either case. Peter is easily in his mid twenties and Franklin is being portrayed as older than five.

    Comment by Pedro Tejeda — January 19, 2010 @ 12:47 am

  7. Here’s a fuller explanation concerning Peter:

    In 1962, Peter was a junior in high school, about 16 years old. In 1978, Peter graduated from college, about 22 years old. So, by the end of the ’70s, Peter had aged 6 years in 16 years of real time.

    Pedro claims that Peter is “easily in his mid-20s” now. Let’s assume that Peter is indeed in at least his mid-20s, and for the sake of argument, let’s peg his current age at 27. That would mean that Peter has aged only 5 years in the 32 years between 1978 and today.

    So, while it’s true that Peter has aged, his aging has slowed incredibly. Between his debut in 1962 and his college graduation in 1978, Peter aged at a rate of about 1 year his time per 3 years our time. Yet between his college graduation and today, Peter has aged at a rate slower than 1 year his time per 6 years our time.

    See what I’m getting at? Peter’s rate of aging has more than halved! If “Marvel Time” hadn’t gotten so much harsher since the end of the ’70s, Peter would now be 32: literally twice as old as he was when he debuted!

    And now for some clarification regarding Franklin:

    Franklin was born in 1967, and by 1984, he was 5 years old. In all likelihood, he *turned* 5 prior to that, but in 1984, it’s explicitly stated in FF that he’s 5.

    Now, guess how old Franklin was in 1998. In other words, guess how old Franklin was 14 years of real time later.

    Give up? He was still 5 years old! In 1998, it’s explicitly stated in FF that he’s (still) 5.

    So, between his birth in 1967 and when he turned 5 years old in 1984 (again: if not earlier!), Franklin aged at a rate of about 1 year his time per 3 years our time. Yet now, Franklin appears to be… what? Maybe 9 years old at the most? So, between 1985 and today, Franklin has aged at a rate of less than 1 year his time per 6 years our time.

    Now, doesn’t that sound familiar? Franklin’s rate of aging – just like Peter’s – has more than halved since the end of the ’70s! Were it not for the strengthening of “Marvel Time”, Franklin would now be 14 years old!

    I hope you guys now understand what I was getting at when I asked you about “Marvel Time” and whether or not you have a problem with it. I don’t know about you, but I wish that the Marvel Universe would open itself up to the possibility of stories about a Spider-Man who’s coming up on middle-age and a Franklin Richards who’s just entering puberty, rather than rehashing the same old stories about a Spider-Man who can never reach his 30s and a Franklin Richards who’ll never reach adolescence!

    Comment by Rand — January 19, 2010 @ 7:52 pm

  8. I really enjoyed Luke Cage Noir also, but in all fairness to the writers, I looked up their credits too. You mentioned Benson wrote Entourage but didn’t mention that he wrote on the Bernie Mac show. And Adam Glass you mocked for doing a black sitcom but left out that he also has been a writer producer on Cold Case and The Cleaner.

    Comment by David Lee — March 6, 2010 @ 4:25 am

  9. First off Benson wrote some very strong Moon Knight books and I loved his Wolverine one shot. Benson and Glass’ Suicide Kings is the best Deadpool book since Deadpool vs The Marvel Universe and Classic Deadpool. This book is really well done. Love the art and the story. A lot of fun. I can’t wait for the Deadpool Noir.

    Comment by Matt — May 18, 2010 @ 8:23 pm

  10. Benson is also really cute. I met him in SDCC. Nice guy.

    Comment by Kim — May 18, 2010 @ 8:29 pm

  11. David: In our defense, if you look up Mike Benson on IMDB you get a hit for executive producing Entourage but nothing on Bernie Mac; his writing credits are under Michael Benson for whatever reason. As for Adam Glass, I am pretty clueless on the police procedural landscape; All About the Andersons is the only show I’ve actually seen out of his four writing credits (the fourth being Blue Collar TV)

    I couldn’t get into Benson’s Moon Knight at all, and tend to politely ignore most secondary Wolverine/Punisher/Deadpool books that come out, though when I do peek into those corners I usually find them wanting. I should probably give Benson another shot based on Cage Noir.

    I cannot speak to his attractiveness, as I’ve never met him.

    Comment by Chris Eckert — May 18, 2010 @ 8:40 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Powered by WordPress