Post by brentlambert on May 10, 2011 12:32:35 GMT -5
GAMBIT 2010: Year In Review
(#19-24) by David Brashear
The Cast: Gambit, Jean-Luc LeBeau, Jacques LeBeau, Alain Theroux, Fleur, and May
Antagonists Faced: Fontanelle, Courier, New Son, Antiquary, Shadowtechs, Dark Beast, and Mr. Sinister
Standout Character: Fontanelle
Best Moment: May taking on the name of Fleur
Overall: I am of mixed feeling about this series. Having read it all from the beginning, I can see that David was attempting to tell a pretty ambitious story, but it ultimately falls flat. The primary reason? Because it seems that David is rushing through his issues. I’m not one to harp on length because I’ve read good one-page stories and bad fifty-page ones. It’s just a matter of whether the story is truly complete or not. And I feel like David missed the mark on this with just about every issue because there was a supreme lack of detail. There are one-sentence scenes in a lot of these issues (19-24) that were desperately in need of more detail. That’s one thing I consistently said to myself as reading these issues. Detail, detail, detail. That would have improved the quality immensely.
The lack of detail makes a lot of the elements of this series just unbelievable. Jacques LeBeau’s characterization was so wimpy and the work wasn’t done to justify his behavior. And what happened to Dark Beast when New Son snatched him? That plot was completely dropped. And Nathaniel Essex feeling like he had to run from a couple of human thieves just did not work without the detail explaining why. The origin of New Son is full of holes. David’s narrative is screaming at you “accept this simply because I write it”, which just can’t work for a thinking reader.
With that said, I can see what David was trying to do. He had all the elements in place for a truly good story IF he had put the work into making it such. As it stands, I have a hard time not comparing it to FabNic’s Gambit and sadly, these issues fall short of that.
(#19-24) by David Brashear
The Cast: Gambit, Jean-Luc LeBeau, Jacques LeBeau, Alain Theroux, Fleur, and May
Antagonists Faced: Fontanelle, Courier, New Son, Antiquary, Shadowtechs, Dark Beast, and Mr. Sinister
Standout Character: Fontanelle
Best Moment: May taking on the name of Fleur
Overall: I am of mixed feeling about this series. Having read it all from the beginning, I can see that David was attempting to tell a pretty ambitious story, but it ultimately falls flat. The primary reason? Because it seems that David is rushing through his issues. I’m not one to harp on length because I’ve read good one-page stories and bad fifty-page ones. It’s just a matter of whether the story is truly complete or not. And I feel like David missed the mark on this with just about every issue because there was a supreme lack of detail. There are one-sentence scenes in a lot of these issues (19-24) that were desperately in need of more detail. That’s one thing I consistently said to myself as reading these issues. Detail, detail, detail. That would have improved the quality immensely.
The lack of detail makes a lot of the elements of this series just unbelievable. Jacques LeBeau’s characterization was so wimpy and the work wasn’t done to justify his behavior. And what happened to Dark Beast when New Son snatched him? That plot was completely dropped. And Nathaniel Essex feeling like he had to run from a couple of human thieves just did not work without the detail explaining why. The origin of New Son is full of holes. David’s narrative is screaming at you “accept this simply because I write it”, which just can’t work for a thinking reader.
With that said, I can see what David was trying to do. He had all the elements in place for a truly good story IF he had put the work into making it such. As it stands, I have a hard time not comparing it to FabNic’s Gambit and sadly, these issues fall short of that.