Marvel: 1602 - how is it?

[Jayaprakash Satyamurthy]

Neil Gaiman's re-invention of prominent Marvelverse heroes in a 17th-century setting recently came out in trade paperback. I've heard differing views on this - some claim that the story is too reliant on an in-depth knwoeldge of Marvel history to work for a non-fan, others say it may not be as brilliant as Gaiman's finest work, but is definitely a cool comic anyway. Has anyone read this? What do you think?

 

[Leto]

Good and interesting, not the best of Neil Gaiman though.

 

[Winters_Sorrow]

I've got this & quite enjoyed it. It was fun trying to see how Neil had given the heroes 'careers' different to those we're used to such as making Daredevil a troubador/spy

I hear that they're planning to make a follow-up series to it.
One thing escapes me though, who was the girl who could turn into animals? I didn't recognise her.

 

[Leto]

I hear that they're planning to make a follow-up series to it.
One thing escapes me though, who was the girl who could turn into animals? I didn't recognise her.

Peter was my favorite :
Yes, by Greg Pak.

The girl was an original character (loosely based on Snowbird of Alpha Flight).

 

[Winters_Sorrow]

ah - that'd be why I didn't recognise her then!
Cheers Leto - do you think there was any significance in what finally happened to her btw?

 

[Brian G Turner]

So a decent read for people with no idea about many of the Marvel characters?

 

[Leto]

WS, yes very especially compared to the Snowbird of early Alpha flight.

Brian, definitly, even if there's many innuendos for hardcore Marvel fans (Angel quiproquo on Jean for example), it can be read as a standalone, and the art is a pure beauty. As you like Neil Gaiman work, I would certainly urge you to read it.

 

[Shoegaze99]

So a decent read for people with no idea about many of the Marvel characters?

Decent, but not essential. Gaiman's writing is very good (certainly no surprise), and while I am no fan at all of Kubert's pencils, the coloring makes up for his stylistic shortcomings with a nice "artificial painting" look. It's certainly pretty enough.

A good portion of the story's enjoyment is derived from all the winks and nods and nudges to established Marvel history - a great deal of that fun will be lost on readers who won't be able to pick out the characters - and in fact the big hook is all about Marvel continuity, too. What is left when that aspect is stripped away is pretty good, but pales when set next to Gaiman's other comic work. Unless you're an ardent Marvel fan, I'd venture into 1602 only if you find a good price. Like I said, it's a decent enough read, but not at all essential, even for a Gaiman fan.