Salvatore Larroca's closing double-page spread for The Invincible Iron Man #512 is that rarest of experiences in the modern-era monthly super-book; a comics diptych which not only brilliantly serves the narrative, but does so in a way which no other form of storytelling on the page could match, let alone improve upon.
It's not that Larroca's work on these two sides is without its problems. In the detail above, for example, the foreshortening on the Dreadnought's left leg is unconvincing, while by contrast, the left arm appears to be implausibly long. Worse yet, Larroca draws attention unfavourably to the semi-circular features clustered on the Dreadnought's thigh-armour, leaving the robot looking as if it's sporting unthreateningly white-spotted, scarlet jockey-shorts.
But those very qualities of awkwardness mostly work in the favour of the composition as a whole. Larroca's chosen to accentuate the gracelessness of several of the Dreadnoughts, and in doing so gives us the impression of machines responding by necessity to the aerial conditions they're experiencing. While much of the worth of the shot as a whole relies upon the sense of the Dreadnought's implacable forward momentum, the presence in their number of robots which appear to be attempting to jerkily adapt to circumstance suggests technology that's as distinct as it is similar to that of Iron Man's. These are creatures with their own specific body language, with their own presence and therefore their own mechanical personality. Furthermore, there's a sense of audience-involving verisimilitude created by the suggestion of the buffeting of crosswinds and updrafts which brings the scene to life, which encourages the reader to think of flying as a dynamic rather than a passive process. It's something which that the super-book rarely does. This isn't the presentation of flight as an effortless and therefore imaginatively disengaging experience. Instead, it presents it as a challenging trial which requires even the Dreadnought's programming to carry an awareness of the environment and the potential to compensate - no matter how sometimes artlessly - for challenging conditions.
In fact, the whole design works to involve the reader in the progress of the Dreadnoughts towards their target. The most distant of the robots forms the apex of what's effectively an equilateral, equiangular triangle, with the twin flanks of the robot flight arranged roughly along the two edges leading towards it. (Larroca has of course placed his figures fluidly on either side of the triangle's form so as to avoid an all-too-obvious and static arrangement on the page.) This works to create the illusion that the reader's seeing events from the point-of-view of the next Deadnought in line, and ensures that the first plane that events are perceived within reaches horizontally forward towards the sight-distorting sun on the horizon. Similarly, the fact that each robot is placed either above or below the reader's initial point-of-view suggests a great threatening number of weapons of mass destruction swarming onwards. It's a design which ensures that the very first thing which the reader perceives is the speed and strength of the Dreadnoughts as they power towards their target.
But the brilliance of this composition lies in how it also creates a second plane in which to experience events. For, as in the detail above, Dreadnoughts have also been placed to carry the reader's gaze downwards towards Sandouping below, creating a vertiginous sense of height and jeopardy. Again, Larroca's art isn't obsessively perfect here; some of the perspective work in the structures to the right of the two pylons is a touch indistinct and confusing. Yet anyone who can't disengage from dwelling on those few and largely irrelevant details is missing a rare experience in the super-book. What appears to be the addition of well-judged freehand tracings over a photograph of the Three Gorges Dam creates a mixture of precision with spontaneity, and that suggests a specific, well-observed and distinctly real-world environment. In looking down as well as ahead, the reader finds themselves enjoying one of the outstanding virtues of the well-executed post-Hitch/Authority widescreen shot; the juxtaposition of the fantastic with the mundane, of the patently unreal colliding excitingly with the obviously everyday. Here the contribution made by Frank D'Armata's colours deserve the highest praise. His well-judged use of a pallet dominated by subtle greens and browns differentiates the different aspects of the landscape without ever drawing the eye away from the action of the piece. Where a less discriminating colourist might have directed our gaze to the explosions threatening the dam's structure, D'Armata quite rightly chooses not to distract us from the forward motion of the Dreadnoughts. Similarly, he avoids making the robots in any way garish or otherwise cartoony, allowing the reader to believe that the Dreadnoughts and the Three Gorges Dam occupy the same reality. In doing so, it's actually the restrained but eye-directing glow of the robot's boot-jets which dominate the page's colour-scheme and pulls our gaze forwards into the panel towards the horizon's distant glare.
Unlike the vast majority of today's comics diptychs, Larroca's work here repays far more than a single glance. The page itself initially creates an intense sense of foreboding from those above-mentioned three key aspects of his work; the apparently irresistible drive forwards of the Dreadnoughts, the worrying and giddy sense of height, and the hi-tech destruction of the undefended damn. But there's also secondary elements of the design, such as the ominous difference in the water-level between the right-hand and and left-hand pages, which inspires a slightly delayed awareness of how appalling the consequences of the Mandarin's actions may well be. Cleverly, Larroca has also divided the page into two triangles through the placement of the line of the damn itself. As it stretches up from the bottom right of the scene, and creates another division of the frame into two sections, it suggests a world that's slightly askew, and creates the almost-subliminal impression that the waters of the lake are pressing down with terrible force upon the dam's structure, pushing the far end of it just slightly forwards even before the worst arrives.(Of course, the progress of the flight of the Dreadnoughts takes them right through the hypotenuse created by the top of the dam, which again summons a sense of a strong structure which is profoundly threatened.) Even the fact that the dam's too strong for the Dreadnought's attack to immediately breach it only emphasises how terrible the consequences of it being destroyed would be. (After all, why would any dam need to be that resistant to attack, and what would happen if it failed to hold?) Typically, the results of a super-villainous assault upon a vulnerable structure are explained in the text, or sketched out in a what-if shot containing a shorthand depiction of destruction featuring the suffering of a mass of anonymous victims. By contrast, Larroca's work unhysterically inspires the reader to create that hypothetical scenario for themselves, which more than justifies writer Matt Fraction's decision to leave the bulk of the heavy lifting for this part of the story in the hands of his colleague.
Salvador Larroca's work isn't always to my own taste, although the man can hardly be blamed for that. It's just that I tend not to enjoy art which seems regularly sourced from photographs and, as a consequence, somewhat still and mannered. Yet here he's created a closing shot for The Invincible Iron Man #512 which in another's hands could have so easily been a cold-hearted collage of photo-shopped elements which fulfilled the story-brief without adding anything of significance at all. Yet quite the contrary is true, and my own scepticism is quite disarmed. His contribution stands as the most outstanding double-page spread which I've seen in the mainstream super-book so far in 2012.Your suggestions for examples of the breed which are anything other than bombast and space-wasting, and which I've either forgotten, ill-judged or missed, would be welcome in the comments below. (*1)
.




I wish I could come up with this many interesting things to say about art and panel composition.
ReplyDeleteI remember being very impressed by that page when I read it as well. Larroca is very hit or miss with me, going from stunning work like that on one page to incredibly awkward the next. When he's on form, it's phot-inspired art at some of it's best. When he's off, it's lifeless and awkward. Unfortunately, he tends to leap between those two extremes seemingly at whim, often within the same comic. Frustrating.
Of course, "frustrating" is also the perfect word to describe "Invincible Iron Man" as a whole. It's sometimes brilliant and full of good ideas, but also filled with occasionally baffling bad choices in storytelling on both creator's parts. And even at almost forty issues, it has yet to live up to the high mark that it's opening arc "The Five Nightmares" set. Like I said, frustrating.
Hello Adam:- Thanks for your kind words. I wish I felt at all confident about these pieces. They're very much the product of a bloke who knows nothing about art staring at a page or two for hours in an attempt to work out why he likes something, like a hound staring at a sealed can of dog food in the hope of working out how to get at what's inside. I have a terrible feeling that the end result is the equivilant of a hound attempting to tear through the metal to the good stuff. I think this is the general impression among the good eggs who drop into the blog, as these pieces do tend to get a low response, but then, that means that I need to learn how to do such pieces better. Having a sense that your frustrations with Iron Man overlap considerably with mine certainly reassures me that my concerns aren't mine alone. In fact - and I'm really grateful to you for this - your analysis of TIIM is effectively mine. I've saved up for the two Omnibus collections, so I'm not someone who doesn't want to give the comic a fair break. And yet I too feel that the Five Nightmares was the highlight by far of the run by far, and I share your feelings that the art and story are often hit-and-miss, and within the same story and even the same page too. On the one hand, this is surely the sign of a team with, as you say, ideas. On the other, it's a long run to still be displaying such inconsistencies. Very odd, very regrettable.
DeleteAgain, it's hard not to wonder what one of the classic editors of the past, such as Archie Goodwin, might not have helped to come about here. It does seem that editors today tend to have different responsibilities to monitoring and advising on the detail of storytelling, but I can't help but feel that that's what so many super-books desperately need today. Of course, it takes a special editor in terms of knowledge and empathy to know how to pull such a responsibility off.
As I said, I enjoy your artwork examinations if simply because they are so much more in depth and informative than anything I could conceive of saying. Drawing is not my forte, even when it comes to talking about it. I wrack my brain for something to say, and the most I can usually come up with is a slightly wordier variation of 'It's purty" for approval, or that fart-like noise that chimpanzee's make with their mouth when they fling feces at people when art displeases me. So know that you have my approval for these pieces, but that my bar for mind-blowing achievement on this front is quite low.
DeleteAnd I'm glad to know that I'm not alone in "IIM" being an incredibly frustrating experience. I remember reading those first five issues and saying "Ok, now THAT'S what an Iron Man comic should be!" If felt like the then-up-and-comer Matt Fraction had finally found his footing and started his entry into the big-leagues by coming out of the gate screaming... and then it was all downhill from there.
I thought for a while that maybe it was just rosy hindsight coloring my view, but then I went back and reread those first issues, and it's pretty inescapable that "The Five Nightmares" set a pace that none of the other story arcs have come close to matching.* Not only that, but there's been pretty much no thematic growth for the series since then either. And it's not just Fraction either; Larocca's art was much more consistent in those first few issues as well.
I have a feeling that the two of them may have been so dead-set on having something to prove in the beginning that they outpaced themselves in the first leg of the race.
*It's sometimes hard to believe that the same Matt Fraction who wrote criminally under appreciated "The Order" is the same Matt Fraction writing the dull and empty "Mighty Thor."
Hello Adam:- I'm with you on the difficulty of writing about artwork on anything other than the - perfectly legitimate - "I like/I don't" level. I'm tracking down books which discuss comics art in a way that helps a non-specialist such as myself start to find things to say. (I'm reading R.C. Harvey on comics art and Collings on Old Masters this week.)But it's one of the things which I know I need to get SO much better at, and where better to practise than a blog?
DeleteI've read speculation that MF's Iron Man has suffered from having the character's fate tied up in the broader events of the Marvel Universe. If that's true, then the lack of taut plotting in the post-5-nightmares tales may just be a reflection of the fact that MF couldn't decide when key beats were hit, or indeed, what those key beats are.
But then, Mighty Thor and Fear Itself were - in my opinion - terrible, terrible books. Perhaps MF has simply developed a style which focuses more on spectacle than content. That's his call, of course. Hats off to anyone who's in control of what they write. I don't want to be reading such comics, of course, but if MF's writing for himself and he's pleased with it, then more power to his elbow. It's just that I don't read any of his books anymore, and I regret that.
I don't care if you get hundreds of comments on this, but I definitely really like these types of pieces here. It contributes more to my understanding of the medium, and learning how to do it well, than most others.
ReplyDeleteI've read a bit of Fraction's Iron Man, and I agree that I can't quite get what's supposed to be great about him - I like elements of it, like the idea of Pepper Pots' non-violent Rescue suit as a great way around the restrictions on Stark Ind. against creating weaponry. But I agree about it overall, it doesn't really jump out much as brilliant storytelling.
I really do like the awkward robot poses, and I think your analysis is pretty on-target. And as always, I appreciate your attempts to find good elements in something which otherwise repels you - the "widescreen" format, in this case.
Hello Historyman:- Thanks for noticing that I'm trying to virtues in aspects of storytelling which I struggle to appreciate :) I've no intention of talking myself into admiring the emperor's new clothes, but I don't want to make the oldster's assumption that my own tastes, or prejudices, are ever to be trusted. And this was a prime example of how the double page splash can be made to work and work in a way in which even a panel-heavy, paternalistic approach couldn't. So three cheers and several huzzahs!
DeleteThese are rarely particularly popular types of posts, but that's good training too. I ought to make them more interesting, and try to ensure that there's aspects of the pieces which folks feel comfortable in commenting upon. It's all part of the practising. Next time ....
Colin, could you explain why I'm enjoying Fraction's Iron Man so much yet finding Geoff John's Aquaman to be such a dull plodding chore to get through? On the surface there doesn't seem to be much difference between the two books style (the worst excesses of "writing for the trade", an over reliance on splash pages, etc.. ) and yet there you go. An analysis for a future column perhaps?
ReplyDeleteHello d:- As a career social scientist, I'd be shot if I tried to deduce the answer to such a complex problem from so little data :) But I would agree with you that the IIM is, whatever its problems, a more enjoyable experience than AM at the moment. For me, Aquaman is so thin and obvious a read that it's barely worth reading; a list of two or three plot-points matched to a single pin-up page would do as well as the comic itself. GJ has opted for a style which seems to be aimed at undemanding thirteen year old readers, but it doesn't reward anyone who wants to read a comic carrying anything of complexity and depth at all. Whenever I've returned to IIM, there's been a greater emphasis on matters of character, for example, than AM ever seems to feature.
DeleteA comparison of the style and content of a couple of recent super-books is an interesting idea for a post. Thank you :)
Appreciate you crystallizing my incoherent thoughts into words on a screen. A great talent to have sir!
ReplyDeleteHello d:- I appreciate the question. It's had me thinking about compare and contrast posts all day. I wish I'd had the sense to think of doing more of them before :)I'd certainly like to give one or three a go.
DeleteGabe here, I figured it's best to jump into the conversation later rather than never.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, I've been following Mr. Fraction's run on Iron Man steadily and I do agree there are inconsistencies that (as you stated earlier) are likely tied into the character's presence in so many of the other Marvel titles (which frustrates me to no end). One moment we get Five Nightmares, then we jump to a post-Secret Invasion story. Despite Larroca's art and the necessary tie-ins to never-ending events, I still feel Fraction has a solid handle on the character. He still manages to cull from continuity, while providing contemporary updates on characters like Pepper.
In regards to an aforementioned lack of thematic growth, I think the best Iron Man stories have been about the journey towards redemption. The idea that it is never too late to do the right thing, even for someone like Tony Stark, is an idea that resonates with me deeply. Fraction had a running start with Five Nightmares, where IM is faced with five ideas that would completely undermine his reason for being. Then with World's Most Wanted, we see Tony forced to reexamine himself and his accomplishments while running away from a world that has turned on him, and despite all that he neuters his mind to save them. During his reboot (Stark Resilient), we see the tropes of superhero death and resurrection discussed and dissected. It's here where Tony asks them a question that is in a way, indirectly posed to the reader.
"Do you want me to come back? Even after all that I've done?" (Not the exact quote, but it's along that vein of thinking)
It's a great moment, because IM has the chance to rise again akin to his origin, but he asks those who have seen at his best and worst if he's worth bringing back to life.
I could go on, but I fear I may spoil your experience. Sorry, I do think about IM a lot. I admit bias, as Iron Man #300 was the first comicbook I ever read. I've developed an unhealthy love for the character, and have been writing a tribute piece for Iron Man's big 50th anniversary next March.
But, back to the topic at hand, I do hope to read your thoughts on Fraction's Iron Man. Whether I agree or not, I'm certain that it open my mind to a different avenue of thinking ;)
Hello Gabe:- there's no such thing as a closed topic on the blog and it's good of you to comment on an old post.
DeleteI do feel sympathy for MF - and any modern-era writer - who's struggling with challenges of Events. I would readily agree that MF did appear - in the material I've read - to have a good grasp of his central characters.
The Five Nightmares is certainly the Iron Man story I've enjoyed the most since ... well, I've been sitting here thinking and I think it's the best solo IM tale since the height of the Layton/JrJr years. So I hope that establishes that I'm not occupying some kind of anti-MF stance. Perhaps it's the fact that the post-5 Nightmares stories lost a measure of coherence and concision that means they had less effect on me. The tales took so long to be told that it was hard for me to enjoy them.
Your point about Stark's best stories being about redemption has certainly given me food for thought. By chance, I've just finished a piece on the very first few years of the character's existence for Sequart. It's made me think about the least satisfying tales from that period, which presented Tony as a character who has nothing to apologise about to anyone.
Please do let me know when your tribute piece appears. I'd be interested in what you've got to say about the character on such a remarkable anniversary. By which I mean, when I began reading imports of Marvel Comics, Iron Man was a bimonthly title which was anything but a lineleader. Now Tony's a movie star. It's not a transformation which anyone would've predicted back in the Seventies, but I'm glad it's happened.