GHOSTBUSTERS: LEGION #1 REVIEW

[Brian Geers]

<a href="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/previews/ind/GB1_Reg.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/previews/ind/GB1_Regt.jpg" align=left alt="Ghostbusters: Legion #1"></a> <a href="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/previews/ind/GB1_Var.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/previews/ind/GB1_Vart.jpg" align=left alt="Ghostbusters: Legion #1 variant"></a> Reviewed by: Brian Geers, doctsunami@yahoo.com
Quick Rating: Good
Story Title: Legion, Part One

The latest ‘80s property returns from the grave. Everyone’s favorite paranormal investigators and eliminators are back, and they’re ready to believe you... again.

Writer: Andrew Dabb
Penciller: Steve Kurth
Inker: Pierre-Andre Dery & Chuck Gibson
Colorist: Blond
Letterer: Ed Duheshire
Editor: Sebastian Clavet


Ghostbusters is the latest (but certainly not the least) product of the “Great ‘80s Revival” that has spread like wildfire throughout the comics industry over the past few years. Many of these sorts of books either seem to require an encyclopedic knowledge of the source material or totally revamp the story, choosing to either alienate the casual reader by bogging the story down with obscure trivia or the “old-school” fan by dumping everything that has gone before and giving us an “Ultimate-Style” experience. When faced with an industry that either wants to bury you in decades’ worth of continuity or reinvent itself every third month or so, who, dear reader, are ya gonna call?

GHOSTBUSTERS!!!

Hey. I had to work it in somewhere, folks.

This first monthly effort by 88 M.P.H. Studios resorts to neither extreme, and somehow manages to successfully cater to all audiences. Issue #1 takes place a mere six months after the end of the first movie, so that all that’s needed to get up to speed is a video rental membership and a mere two-hour investment of your time. The inside front cover even includes a comprehensive summary of the movie for the two people on the planet who have picked up the book without having seen the movie beforehand. You don’t need a degree in Ghostbuster Cartoonology to understand the 22 pages that follow, nor do you have to subject yourself to the comparatively mediocre effort that was Ghostbusters 2.

That’s right. No Slimer-the-Sidekick (although the little spud shows up on the back cover), no inexplicably blond Egon Spengler, no having to wonder why Venkman sounds so much like Garfield the cat...

Wait. Scratch that last one.

<a href="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/previews/ind/gb1-1.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/previews/ind/gb1-1t.jpg" align=left alt="Ghostbusters #1 Page 1"></a> <a href="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/previews/ind/gb1-2.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/previews/ind/gb1-2t.jpg" align=left alt="Ghostbusters #1 Page 2"></a>In short, Andrew Dabb skillfully and successfully dumps or ignores all of the baggage that was thrown into the franchise to transform it into the massive kiddie-pleasing merchandising juggernaut that it eventually became.

And do you know what? It worked.

At the same time, Dabb manages to stay true to the source material. It’s no stretch to imagine Bill Murray, Harold Ramis, Dan Akroyd and the rest speaking the dialogue that appears on the page. Venkman is every bit the smooth-talking smart-aleck of the group. Egon is still played as the one with the most brains but the least common sense. And Ray? Actually, Ray seems pretty darn morose in this issue, as he seems to be carrying the weight of the story’s dramatic subplot on his ample shoulders. There are multiple references, both blatant and subtle, to the first movie, but they occur naturally within the flow of the story and never once seem jarring or forced. It reads like it could be the first act of “Ghostbusters 1 ½".

<a href="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/previews/ind/gb1-4.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/previews/ind/gb1-4t.jpg" align=right alt="Ghostbusters #1 Page 4"></a> <a href="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/previews/ind/gb1-3.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/previews/ind/gb1-3t.jpg" align=right alt="Ghostbusters #1 Page 3"></a>Steve Kurth, former artist on Devil’s Due’s G.I. Joe and Micronauts series, seems to have finally found his niche. Ghostbusters seems to suit his unique style, which seems to alternate between semi-realistic and slightly exaggerated depending on the situation. His art matches the story skillfully, outrageously funny or moody and somber at the appropriate times. Kudos as well to the coloring job of the enigmatically named “Blond”, whose hues are eye-catching and on-par with the “Big Boys” at Marvel and DC while at the same time not obscuring or lessening the impact of Kurth’s pencils.

The humor takes the spotlight in this issue, as both major and minor players are reintroduced to the reader, with hints that the big story is still to come. Six months after the Ghostbusters save New York from a fifty-foot tall marshmallow man/incarnation of evil, their popularity seems to be at its peak. The interviews are still rolling in, as are the royalties from the t-shirts, action figures, and video games. They’re poised to open international offices in L.A., London, Paris, and Tokyo (despite the fact that they still only number four ‘Busters and a secretary who’s perpetually “On Break”). Everything looks peachy for our heroes, but little do they know than an ominously lurking evil is lurking ominously in the background (or rather on Pages 1 and 22).

The creative team masterfully sets things up, setting up the slightest hint of drama and suspense while packing plenty of humor in between. The big question that remains is if they can deliver the payoff. Now that the nostalgic “warm fuzzies” are out of the way, can they combine thrills and laughs in a way that will bring readers back when the regular monthly comes out in three months?

Cross your fingers, but whatever you do, don’t cross the streams.


ART:
http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/reviews/gbfull.jpg http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/reviews/gbfull.jpg http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/reviews/gbfull.jpg http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/reviews/gbhalf.jpg http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/reviews/gbnone.jpg

STORY:
http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/reviews/gbfull.jpg http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/reviews/gbfull.jpg http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/reviews/gbfull.jpg http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/reviews/gbhalf.jpg http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/reviews/gbnone.jpg

OVERALL:
http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/reviews/gbfull.jpg http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/reviews/gbfull.jpg http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/reviews/gbfull.jpg http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/reviews/gbhalf.jpg http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/reviews/gbnone.jpg

[Joxer487]

i really enjoyed this, i didnt order it but my brother did, and it was a light week so i read it, and it was really good!

it says 1 of 4, is it going to be a bunch of minis?

[Brian Geers]

Actually, it's a four-issue miniseries with a continuing monthly series starting the month after.

[Danja]

yeah, cos that just makes so much sense. it's probably some kind of safety catch. If it doesn't sell well, they can just quietly scrap the ongoing before it starts and claim that the mini was all they were gonna do.

[DCUnited]

Or they could just do the mini and if it doesn't sell well just decide to cancel the ongoing. It's not uncommon for companies to do that, they wouldn't have to deny that they planned to do it. However, seeing as issue one has sold out I don't think any one needs to worry about the ongoing being canceled.

[chistraub]

If this takes place a mere 6 months after the movie why is the year 2004? It just seems like a huge error in my book and sorta peeved me through the whole issue. Other then that I thought it was ok, not great but pretty good, I'll keep buying it.

[TheRazorsEdge]

The year is '04 because they're saying the movie happened in '03 so they can do it modern.

Sort of like Marvel's Ultimate line except without the reimagining things.

[bmack]

Nice! Ghostbusters have always been the sh!t!!! Don't let anyone tell you otherwise!

~ The Mack

[Al Harahap]

Originally posted by chistraub
If this takes place a mere 6 months after the movie why is the year 2004? It just seems like a huge error in my book and sorta peeved me through the whole issue. Other then that I thought it was ok, not great but pretty good, I'll keep buying it.

Welcome to ComiX-Fan, chistraub. :wave:

That's just how time is done in most comics. For instance, Batman, who was introduced as an adult in 1939, hasn't aged much in 65 years. But only "a few years" has passed in the story in the comics. Likewise, I figure the Ghostbusters creators wanted to do this to keep the characters at their age, but at the same time, keeping the book modern, as TheRazorsEdge said. Best not to think too much about it and go with the flow. ;)

[Brian Geers]

Thanks for putting it so eloquently, Al.

As for my feelings on the time-shift, there's nothing really in the movie that gave me a distinct feeling of 'This takes place in 1984.' The mentions of MTV and Cameron Diaz in this book weren't really all that jarring to me. I think the timelessness of the movie is part of why the book is such a success.

Maybe it's because I'm such a Marvel junkie. The Punisher and much of the cast of G.I. Joe are well-preserved Vietnam war vets. Early in his career, the Hulk smashed Commies. Really. I kid you not. Pick up The Essential Hulk, Vol. 1 and every third story is "Hulk Smash Red Menace. Grrr." :hulk: He was like a big, green, irradiated Joe McCarthy. Heck, according to Stan "The Man" Lee, Reed Richards and Ben Grimm served in World War II. None of it bothered me too much. Several comics are very much the product of the era in which they were written.

[LordofDreams]

oh man, this book made me almost crap my pants with joy. I am so happy they are back with beautiful art and a wonderfuly written story (so far so they better keep up the good work or else)

[heffy]

All my dreams are coming true, well it means I'll be having more dreams about ghostbusters of course!

Maybe this can get to be popular enough that we may see a GB3 someday! Remember they said that there was not a fan base for GB anymore on the DVD commentaries, but I bought the last copy of this booK!


WHO YOU GONNA CALL?

[Judiusx]

Originally posted by chistraub
If this takes place a mere 6 months after the movie why is the year 2004? It just seems like a huge error in my book and sorta peeved me through the whole issue. Other then that I thought it was ok, not great but pretty good, I'll keep buying it.

Well its not really an error if its done on purpose. Besides its never stated in the movie that its 1984, we just assume of course that it does since it was released that year. No I dont believe Harold Ramis and Ivan Reitman intended it to take place in 2004 but my point is that the movie doesn't rely on the events specifically taking place in 1984 or announced to be taking place in 1984 unlike Back to the Future for example which specifically states that Marty's home is in 1985. Being a comic series it just brings the movie into 2004 (or 2005 or 2007 depending when you read the comic since again it doesnt state its 2004, it just says the events of the movie took place "6 months ago").

That said I did have a couple of minor problems with the book, although for the record I liked the book and its easily the best of all the "80's" retro books which it kinda of isn't since this series is based off the movie and not the Saturday morning cartoon.

One minor problem I had was that as much as I like the idea of basing this series off the movie instead of the cartoon the characters don't look like themselves. Aside from Winston being the black guy and Egon the guy with the glasses the characters dont look like their movie counterparts and look like all new characters instead, to me Veikman kinda looked more like a cross between Jeff Goldblum and David Duchovny instead of Bill Murray.

Another minor problem was that again, although its based off the movie and not the cartoon the containment unit looked like its giant animated counterpart instead of the tiny basement movie version.

Like I said these are just minor problems I had.

[Dynamo]

And I was trying to decide whether to buy Ghostbusters or add yet another Xmen title to my collection. I should have bought this one instead.

Great review Brian. You convinced me to go back and pick it up. :)

[Brian Geers]

Originally posted by Judiusx


One minor problem I had was that as much as I like the idea of basing this series off the movie instead of the cartoon the characters don't look like themselves. Aside from Winston being the black guy and Egon the guy with the glasses the characters dont look like their movie counterparts and look like all new characters instead, to me Veikman kinda looked more like a cross between Jeff Goldblum and David Duchovny instead of Bill Murray.

Another minor problem was that again, although its based off the movie and not the cartoon the containment unit looked like its giant animated counterpart instead of the tiny basement movie version.

Like I said these are just minor problems I had.

Well, it seems an unwritten law that, for whatever reason, when Venkman's represented in an artistic medium he invariably must have better hair than Bill Murray ever did. I remember when The Real Ghostbusters first came out, I had initially confused Peter and Ray because the animated Ray had a Murray-esque receding hairline.

Hey, I was ten, for cryin' out loud. Cut me a little slack.

I think that the designs are decent enough (Egon without the Harold Ramis 'fro is fine by me), giving each character a distinct enough look without resorting to the radical measures that the cartoon took (color-coded jumpsuits, Red-Headed Ray, Bleached-Blonde Bimbo Egon, etc.). It's altogether possible that more exact likenesses of the actors can't be used without the permission of (and payment to) the actors involved (I remember a game based on the movie Aliens that used pictures from the movie but couldn't use photos of Sigourney Weaver as Ripley because it would have cost more money).

Dynamo, I'm glad I could convince you into picking this up. I too have had to wrangle with the conflict of whether or not to spend $3 on a flashy new X-Book or on a book that I've heard good things about (or, more realistically, forget about both and use it for gas money :D ). I just wish you luck in finding copies, since the first printing of #1 seems to have sold remarkably well. I've heard that a second printing is on the way, and with that being the case, I'm sure a trade paperback is almost inevitable, so you'll be able to grab it in one form or another if you haven't already.

[TheRazorsEdge]

The containment unit blew up in the movie, so of course they've got a new one. And it only makes sense to make it bigger since they talk about it "getting crowded in there" near the end of the film. I guess using the exact cartoon design was just their way of paying the series a small tribute.

I do always wonder though, how they got the basement bigger, when it was such a tiny little room in the movie...

[Anand Khatri]

is this series good, cuz i collected the old Ghostbusters series that was published by NOW Comics back in the day.

[Brian Geers]

Originally posted by Anand Khatri
is this series good, cuz i collected the old Ghostbusters series that was published by NOW Comics back in the day.

While there's only one issue to judge by so far, I think if you enjoy the license in any way, shape, or form (the movie in particular), then this series is worth a look. Personally, I rather enjoyed the issue and hope that future issues get even better.