Review of Matamoros #1

By Ry on January 24, 2008 | | Comments (8)

A little over a week ago someone sent an email to John asking for a review of a new comic. John asked me, ry, to be included on the review process. So this is my take on the new title Matamoros. So, please don’t mistake this for The Armorer’s opinions.

The most positive thing I can say about this new comic title is that has potential. That Matamoros has room to grow and tell compelling stories even if it does not exactly do that in this first offering.

I just don’t have the cash in the budget to venture on a comic I’m not 100% on, and so I wouldn’t recommend it to anyone else who is not willing to risk $3/month on an iffy title. I definitely wouldn’t recommend it for children under the age of 15 as it is way too adult. Yet, if you’ve got the time and inkling to take a risk I’d say sign up for it. I imagine that people who like 24 and The Shield will be much more open to this book than I. It, like Battle Star Galactica on the Sci-Fi channel, has the ability to become a very engrossing piece if you’re willing to give it the time to develop. I'm rather unwilling.

On a Gollum’s scale of 1-5 yessss my precioussses I give Matamoros a 3 yessss my precioussses. It has potential. It isn’t my cup of tea, but it has taken a novel stance for comics on serious issues. The hero has the capability of being a very deep and rich character one could identify with and like instead of being a clone of the early Punisher before he got his own book (a simple, uninteresting kill-bot) crossed with Wolverine from X-men. If the author’s do that, make Sobietti an engrossing protagonist, Matamoros could enjoy success like other alt niche comics have (Hellboy and Tankgirl becoming so well liked that they became fodder for movies even though 90% of the comic reading pubic had ever heard of them being some examples.) and be a very worthwhile title.
(More below the fold)
--ry

The greatest strength of this title is also its weakness: the in your face nature of the politics. It gets in the way of telling the story, any story actually. It really felt like I was watching some crap Tarantino film where there’s a series of scenes just cobbled together with only the merest attempts at plot to hold them all together. It was very Reservoir Dogs, and that is not a good thing.

The reason big titles like X-men and Batman can handle inclusion of political themes are that there’s a very interesting story in which these ideas and themes are implanted in them. Frank Miller’s The Dark Knight Returns is a great example of this. The social commentary is hard to miss and is very blatant at times (the TV debate show panels), but said commentary never got in the way of telling a tale of daring do. Matamoros seemingly ignored this maxim (tell a fun and interesting story) to run at breakneck speed to the protagonist shooting some home grown terrorists while taking political stances along the way. Another example is the comic book inspired TV show Heroes or the anime series Neon Genesis: Evangelion where political themes and points of philosophy, even annoying ones like the Existentialist laden ending of Evangelion, are integral to the story but not swung like a baseball bat.

Some of the stances were done a bit sotto voce, such as the stem cell research topic, so it is not like the authors do not know how to be restrained. The books on the COL’s table, while obvious, are not screaming in your face like some of the other stances are (the phone call, the title of the book, the newspaper headline). It just seems rather mishmash on the subject of making political statements. The baseball bat to the noggin of political stances does not make for fun reading. It becomes a chore, like trying to read the annoying sophistry of Frank Herbert in the later Dune novels as opposed to the more interesting and challenging reads that are Phillip K. Dick’s novels.

To be fair, it could be that this was done because it is a first issue and because it is an independent release. Being an independent release puts a real limit on much story you can tell because more story means more pages, and more pages costs more money to print. Being a first release you want to make a big splash to grab attention so people will come back to see what you do next month.

But that does not excuse bad story pacing and a thin major story arc.

The material here would best have been broken up into two, maybe three, issues. The injury/recovery and re-integration into civilian life for our protagonist, SGT Sobietti, elements could easily have taken up a single issue with the cliff-hanger of overhearing possible terrorists at a diner ending. The surveillance of, tracking of, and dispatching of terrorist elements could have been extended to fill most of a second issue with another foreshadow, not cliff-hanger, coming at the end of issue two (does Sobietti have to worry about NYPD looking for him or that the terrs now know they’re being hunted so they go looking for him?). Again, this could be done for the reasons of money or for getting initial interest. The title has potential to tell compelling stories about Sobietti and his run-ins with terrorists in NY, but issue one does not tell a compelling story. It tells a short snuff fantasy that someone like Deadpool or the Punisher would be more comfortable with than Captain America---whom the authors imply multiple times is their inspiration for SGT Sobietti. Well, at least the old incarnation of Captain America that is. The new pistol packing Cap might be more in tune with Sobietti, but not having time for that title either I cannot say for sure.

Overall, I didn’t enjoy Matamoros. Mostly that’s because I’m not amenable to many of the political stances the book takes. For example, I don’t think land mines or the infamous claymore mine are a coward’s weapon. I think they’re things that are legal, or should be, that were often abused; and the Princess Di initiative to ban them was rather a misguided if not down right stupid thing. Having said that, I think the use of IED in Iraq, whether they fall in the EFP or bailing wire and spit categories, are an evil thing based on how they’ve been used---to indiscriminately kill in large numbers. It is things like that which make this a title I won’t pick up again. Our POV is just so different, and the things the authors feel compelled to say are not things I particularly want to take the time to hear. I’ve dealt with said questions and issues in other arenas, and have no desire to go thru it again. For those that haven’t done the mental pushups on these issues this is a perfect title to cut your teeth on.

As I opened with though, this book has room to grow. Matamoros has some interesting ideas and a take on the issues different than standard comic fare. If you’re open to some of the ideas, even if open to them only from opposition, this is a book to watch and see if it expands from the snuff fantasy into the much larger and fuller title it could be. It is not for Gollum, but it has the potential to become a good book if the issues of pacing and story telling instead of simply stringing scenes together are dealt with.
-ry


Share This Article:

Categories:

8 Comments

By Boquisucio on January 24, 2008 10:10 AM
Interesting title, which has lost its original meaning over the centuries. It is one which harkens waaaay back to the struggle of liberation. The liberation of Christian Spain against the Muslim Al-Andaluz. It is a title which back then, conveyed both a truly despective disdain against their enemies, and great honor to those conferred-to. In a pre-politically correct era, war used to give us many of such titles. For example, during our Civil War many ferocious units of the South were nicknamed “Yankee Killers”. Yankees were despised and hated, and they cherished the opportunity to kill them. In a similar warrior spirit, Christian Spanish Knights hated the Muslims, and enjoyed slaughtering them. Therefore the term: “Mata Moros” Moor Killer. To get a good feel for this mediaeval mindset, just read El Cid Campeadorin its original 11th Century Castilian like I did, you would understand. But I digress. The term Moro, not only conveys a plain vanilla description of Muslims, but also brings with it the weight of hateful racism. A meaning watered-down over the centuries. You see, the Al-Andaluz Muslim Lords of North Africa (lighter skinned), employed the use of coal-black-skinned Mauritanians as foot soldiers in their armies. Thus the true, and forgotten meaning of Moors: Black. For all the rhetoric, the old stock Al-Andaluz of North African ancestry, invaded Spain during a time of Muslim enlightenment. A time when Damascus and Bagdad were the intellectual capital centers of the world. And thus brought with them and transplanted a culture thirsty for knowledge and tolerance when they settled in Spain. Their Mauritanians allies, on the other hand, were recently converted into Islam. And thus were infected with the firebrand fanaticism of the newly proselytes. By the thousands, they answered the call for jihad – yes jihad – to defend the Muslim lands of Al-Andaluz. They were instantly despised by the Christians. Not only were they Muslim but also of another skin color altogether. What I am trying to say in this roundabout way, is that in its original meaning “Mata Moro”, is one or the most Un Politically Correct terms that I can think-of. A term that I will used not to convey my feelings on the matter, but to let the gentle readers understand its true hateful meaning. To the Mediaeval Spaniard “Mata Moro” not only meant “Muslim Killer” but “Nigger Killer” as well. And because words have meanings, and meanings have words, what is the message that the author want convey to the public with this title vis-à-vis this so called Global War on Terror?
 
By BillT on January 24, 2008 12:38 PM
I don't think the authors went *that* far back researching the matamoros, Boq. By the fifteenth century, Knights of Sant Iago received title and insignia simultaneously, so title and insignia became synonymous. The original derivation faded (as have the original derivations of hundreds of words in most languages) and, for better or worse, Matamoros has become just another term for Crusader.
 
By kat-missouri on January 24, 2008 1:06 PM
I have to admit, that was an interesting little lessen in history that I wasn't aware of even though I had looked up the term. Thanks, Boq. However, I have to agree with Bill and some others, that the problem as you state it will not equate to most readers, black or white as they will be simply more familiar with the idea of "crusader". I think Ry's review is interesting if you can take some criticism, though possibly over the top a little in expecting it to have the sophistication of a long existing comic book. Which he does give as a point a few times and ends with the "can develop". Then again, I haven't read it, just seen the adverts so I don't want to be too harsh on Ry either. I do think that Cox purposefully made everything clear and in your face because that is exactly the kind of cartoonist he's been this entire time. though some of their cartoons were subtle in their sarcasm and irony, most of them were simply black and white. Treason v. Patriotism. Possibly the entire point was to stop being mealy mouthed subtle about terrorism and terrorists or its Islamist roots. and we, maybe are the problem. I still recall those old Captain America comics that weren't too adverse to calling a Nazi a Nazi. Thus, I imagine that those who will want to read this comic will not be simply those who have not done the "mental pushups" on the subject, but who are simply tired of all the "subtlety" and wish someone would just "talk straight". I'll leave the question of whether it jumps around too much to when I read it. I think I was hoping to hear that this was a comic about our soldiers in the field. That maybe my biggest disappointment in reading Ry's review.
 
By Boquisucio on January 24, 2008 2:32 PM
***Silently creeps into Cricket's Kitchen... Cracks open the lid on the crock-pot, and looks at the stew that Gollum has kindly made for us all. Takes in a deep whiff and proclaims...**** "Ah yes - Nice bouquet of Social Consternation, with a subtle note of Dissension; but may need a pinch more of Disquiet". ***Puts the lid back on the stew, and walks back to his Scriptorium at 3-North**** Seriously though, my first impression of the title was: At last, someone is virile enough to call a Spade, A Spade. Seven full years into this, we still can't bring ourselves to state the obvious. We, the Western World is at war with the Muslim World. At the tip of the spear are countless of our modern day Mata Moros. Killers of Religious Fanatics pure and simple.
 
By Darius_LaMonica on January 24, 2008 3:47 PM
All: I'm one of the co-writers of the book. ry: although I wish you had enjoyed the book more, I appreciate your candor and your review. If we had a publisher then we could've done a bit more to "stretch" out some of the storylines, but honestly, self-publishing isn't easy so we had to assume this would be a short miniseries or even a one-shot. Regarding the landmine comment, that page was set up to contrast the "enlightened" view of mines by the European elites versus their use as a primary weapon by Islamists. If transnational progressives are appalled by landmines, they sure are having a hard time criticizing their use by Islamists. Boquisucio: yes, we were aware of the etymology of the word “moros” and even of its origins from Greco-Roman times. I can assure you that the phrase “N-word killer” was the furthest thing from our minds and everything I’ve read on the topic (Bernard Lewis, Bostom, etc.) indicated the name was used in the context of classifying Moslem invaders during the civilizational war for the Iberian peninsula. The sole use of the word in the comic was in the context of resisting a jihadist military attack. I can discuss this further, including how the word applies to the protagonist and to the title, by email if you need more information. BillT : I think it is unfortunate that people just equate the term with the Crusades. The “crusades” is now equivalent in postmodern lingo to a religiously motivated imperialist war, which nobody wants, whereas the reconquista was about punching an aggressive bully in the face. People do not want to forcibly convert Moslem countries from their religion, but neither do they want Islamists to destroy Western civilization and replace it with a sharia state. FYI - I think the west has done enough self-flagellation about the Crusades. I have yet to hear an apology for 1400 years of jihadist imperialism. kat-missouri: unfortunately, the protagonist *is* on the battlefield for the entire book. Islamists refer to the entire west as the House of Strife (dar al harb) and to them any location is a legitimate military target. One of the men I thought of while co-writing the book was Rick Rescorla, the head of security at Morgan Stanley who died on 9/11. He was in the Army during the Ia Drang campaign (Hal Moore, the officer in charge of one of the 1st Cavalry battalions in the fight, called Rescorla the best platoon leader he ever saw) and his actions to save the 2000+ employees of Morgan Stanley were just as heroic as what he’d done 35 years earlier. To the NVA the Ia Drang was a legitimate battlefield; to Atta and his ilk the WTC was also a battlefield, and Rescorla did his best to combat both.
 
By ry on January 25, 2008 5:56 AM
ooooh. now you've done it Darius. Told people they don't know Rick Rescorla around here. Major faux pau(so I can't spell. so shoot me, John). Particularly Kat-mizzou. :) (tongue in cheek, tongue in cheek). Kat, if you notice I didn't say anything about Cox. The artwork had nothing to do with it. Good comics rely on story and not the art. Look at the graphic novel Maus. First time effort. Amazing story. Art work is waaay simplistic, but you read it because of the story it tells(and universities assign it in certain comp-lit classes. Note: I never took a comp-lit course, I exploited every hole I could find to avoid it.) There have been times favorite titles have been unreadable but very nice to look at(the Rob Leifield era comes to mind) It can be done, and good books do do that. I came to it as a long term comics reader, having seen very good titles come from first time writers on the first issue release(and a ton of pure trash along the way). The Next Men comes to mind as a very well done book from start to finish from a first time author with a totally new set of heroes. It can be done, and I'm not going to go easy on someone simply because we are on the same side of the debate. Also, I gave it a three out of five. Gaussian distribution(and why would I use anything other than a Gaussian?) means average would be 2.5. I gave it a three. It was good, it was new in outlook, and I gave it credit for being non-mealy mouthed. But that's a novelty, and being 'the only straight talking book around' fades quickly.. A truly good book needs more than novelty to last. What was there showed me that Darius and Sleet had spent lots of thought on who SGT Sobietti is, and what his purpose is. It just didn't come across so well, much of their thought didn't make it onto the page. Later comms with Darius seems that I was right. The iffy-ness of production really hurt the quality of the book. Limited budget, not working for a major house(and almost all the minors are owned by the majors(you get two choices, DC and Marvel)), and it comes back to hurt the story. Seen it a zillion times. It is very unfortunate. I wasn't simply taking it easy on Darius by saying I thought the book had potential, or saying it because we both agree on GWOT. Nope, this one showed room for improvement, honestly(unlike the book some chucklehead tried to push having Sean Hannity leading a resistance movement against a UN that had taken over the US and lead by Osama bin Laden. That had nowhere to go and was flat out stupid.). It could, given some thought about how to tell good stories on limited budget(proll'y why it was in b/w instead of color too), last long enough to be picked up by one of the few truly independent houses around. I wasn't bs'ing on that. And nobody is picking on me for verbosity? Dang, I disappear for a while and you all turn into slackers. Darius, "that page was set up to contrast the "enlightened" view of mines by the European elites versus their use as a primary weapon by Islamists. If transnational progressives are appalled by landmines, they sure are having a hard time criticizing their use by Islamists" That's exactly what I mean by 'baseball bat to the head'. It was so over the top that criticism of Euro-weenies got lost on me. THe first thing that popped up into my head at the word 'cowards' was "Gee I've heard that before. Don't the twits at DU and DKos say our troops are cowards for using CAS?" The next thought was, 'Hey, we use landmines and claymores, one of the few countries that still do. I don't think that's a good way of making the point that IED are evil weapons.' You wound up for a wicked slapshot at Euro-weenies and fanned on your shot. That hurts your book. Honestly, dude, your book has potential. It might go over better if you did it as a graphic novel and then tried to parley that into a monthly. Just a thought. And, homes, yeah, I know how hard it is indy publishing. I should tell you about my buddy Jason and how many independent projects he's started and had fall out from under him. It isn't fair that good ideas get relegated to the sidelines, if they get to play at all, but that's the business. That's why I never went in with Jay on his projects---I knew I was going to lose money no matter how good the ideas were. Tough road. I wish you the best.
 
By ry on January 25, 2008 6:02 AM
What are you doing in the Kitchen, Boq? It's bad enough that Cricket will kill me for messing up her Kitchen, but now I've got you messing with me stew? I'm doomed. Rats.
 
By BillT on January 25, 2008 9:55 AM
People do not want to forcibly convert Moslem countries from their religion... Which causes them to forget that the original intent of the first crusades were *also* conducted to "punch a bully in the face." ...but neither do they want Islamists to destroy Western civilization and replace it with a sharia state. And there are those who *do* -- and who are actively campaigning to install shari'a. Right. Here. Just call me a Crusader -- in the *original* context of the term. Feel free to add Myrmidon, too... *grinnnnn*