PDA

View Full Version : Magician Review


SFFWorld.com
Home - Discussion Forums - News - Reviews - Interviews

New reviews, interviews and news

New in the Discussion Forum


Fuxxy Elf
May 3rd, 2006, 08:26 AM
Hey Kater regarding your review of Magician and the comment about it being the first major fantasy work to be made into a comic. Now there's a debate to be had:D

Are you discounting the recent Dragonlance and R.A Salvatore's Drizzt comics due to personal opinion of the books that they are based on?

But more importantly what about the old Marvel Conan comics that did do direct adaptations of the original Robert E. Howard stories? Or is that not a major fantasy work?

Plus the Elric comics though I can't remember if they were direct adaptations or just new adventures using the character. And the comic adaptations of Mort and The Light Fantastic.

Oh boy that sounded like a rant, it wasn't meant to be. I'm just wondering why it is your opinion Magician is the first major fantasy work to be adapted?

On a personal note, I think I'll be skipping this one, from what I saw of the Dragonlance adaptation anything of that length cannot be satisfyingly adapted in just six issues, I'd rather stick to the books.

kater
May 3rd, 2006, 06:56 PM
Yeah I figured that one would come home to roost :D I got a pm from Rob along the lines of 'dude have you forgotten these: Martin's Hedge Knight, Jordan's Wheel of Time/A New Spring, Salvatore's Dark Elf and Moorcock's Elric.'

I'll defend it by saying I can see where you're coming from but I kinda hoped couching it in the phrase 'to my mind' (which has a one morning shelf life :D ) suggested it was opinionated rather than a 'truth'. I tried to nod toward what has come before but to the list: Hedge Knight isn't ASOIAF, I can't stand Jordan so that didn't count to me :) I love Elric but is Moorcock generally as popular or as well read by the young age demographic Magician is targeting, again not sure. Drizzt has to be right up there in the popularity stakes and this is probably just me being defensive of a slightly thoughtless wording but to me this is the first time someone has taken on such a popular series with the intent of seeing it through in a semi-extended run rather than doing an offshoot title. I'm willing to have my mind changed :D and will look into it further, maybe there's an article in all this for the Comics section :)

Oh and the review in question is here: http://www.sffworld.com/crevoff/16.html :)

Fuxxy Elf
May 4th, 2006, 05:29 AM
My apologies, good etiquette would have been a PM. I didn't mean to attack your opinions at all. I just thought it was good debate that should be opened up to the floor. What do people think of the current trend of adapting fantasy works into comics? Are they really worth it when the books are generally of a better quality simply because of the limited size of a comic series compared to an epic novel?

I'd prefer spin offs or off shoots using known characters in new situations that fit a comics length, simply because a story written specifically for a comic is surely more satisfying than fitting 1000 pages of literature into a 100 page comic series.

kater
May 4th, 2006, 06:38 AM
No apologies necessary :) , it's a good topic and I'll confess to not having read a lot of the fantasy-comic book conversions/adaptations. I think they're a good idea as long as it's in the best interests of the work rather than the author/comic company looking to make as much bank as possible from an already established and popular product. I'd say we've become a much more visual society with the idiot box and movies consuming lots of people's spare time and this is the appeal of these comic book adaptations in the same way movies like LOTR are. Condensing is the major problem and I think you have to view comic book adaptations as a simplification of whatever material they are adapting.

Eventine
May 4th, 2006, 11:09 PM
My apologies, good etiquette would have been a PM. I didn't mean to attack your opinions at all. I just thought it was good debate that should be opened up to the floor. What do people think of the current trend of adapting fantasy works into comics? Are they really worth it when the books are generally of a better quality simply because of the limited size of a comic series compared to an epic novel?

I'd prefer spin offs or off shoots using known characters in new situations that fit a comics length, simply because a story written specifically for a comic is surely more satisfying than fitting 1000 pages of literature into a 100 page comic series.

I've only read the Hedge Knight adaptation, but I think itworked well because it's a spin off. Short stories/novellas are obviously a much better target for adaptation than multi-volume epics.

Something to consider, and I think Kater touched on this, is how the story telling will differ between the medium due to the devices available. For example, what may be a one page description of an object in a novel may easily translate into a picture. But what are you losing then, of the original style? What transports well between the mediums? For example, a long conversations might not be suited to graphic novel form, but might have even more impact in a film.

It seems to me that direct conversions are more about cashing in than telling the story in the best way possible, and playing to the strengths of your medium. Why not get the fantasy authors writing for the format (such as Neil Gaiman does) rather than adapting work that works well in a non-graphic format?

Rob B
May 8th, 2006, 12:46 PM
I picked it up at the LCS last week and thought it was pretty good. Like Owen, it has been a while (probably 5 years) since I read Magician. I've actually wanted to re-read the story to see how it stood the test of time (and other books I've read in the interim), but I digress.

I enjoyed it, thought Booth's art was decent, if not spectacular. Too anime-ish for my liking and I felt it didn't quite fit the tone of the story. Not an apples and oranges mixture of difference, but perhaps oranges and tangerines.

It did seem a bit rushed, but with these things, it is always best to treat adaptations differently than the source material. I will be picking up the second issue, and I'll try to continue to read it on its own merits.

I think the Dabel Brothers chose the right guy in Mike Oeming - he's shown real proclivity with the Fantasy genre (check out his Hammer of the Gods story)

Side note, regarding Gaiman - the Neverwhere comics adaptation was actually written/scripted by Mike Carey. While a lot of Sandman consider Carey and his Lucifer series something of an heir apparent, it was Cary who (I think picked by Gaiman) to do the comics adaptation.

kater
May 8th, 2006, 06:27 PM
I picked it up at the LCS last week and thought it was pretty good. Like Owen, it has been a while (probably 5 years) since I read Magician. I've actually wanted to re-read the story to see how it stood the test of time (and other books I've read in the interim), but I digress.


I did read Magician again on the back of the comic and I think it captures the early mood quite well. I think Magician really is a book of two halves, up until Pug gets abducted it's very young fantasy but with the political element and the main characters growing up the tone seems to alter appreciably. It will be interesting to see if the comic mirrors this change. Fwiw I found re-reading Magician to be every bit as enjoyable an experience as the first few times around and were it not for the burgeoning weight of the Thousandfold Thought fresh at the top of my pile I'd have ploughed on into Silverthorn :)