I’ve been to the year 3000, not much has changed but the Justice League are pretty big jerks and the universe sucks more.- The Jonas Brothers, sort of.
Written by Keith Giffen and J.M. DeMatteis
Illustrated by Howard PorterThe new series starring the heroes of today—tomorrow is resolicited, now with legendary artist Howard Porter (JLA) on board! But what are these heroes doing in the year 3000? And who (or what) brought them there? Get ready for a dose of wonder from the writing team of Keith Giffen and J.M. DeMatteis!
Out of the ashes of another failed (though surprisingly long-lasting) Legion run, “Justice League 3000” is the latest comic vehicle for the DC universe’s far-flung future. Rather than featuring brightly clad youths bound by their adoration of Superman, JL3K builds on the legacy in a much grimmer fashion. So, pretty much par for the course.
Cynicism aside (sorry, it’s a reflex), Giffen and DeMatteis do present a fairly strong hook for their Justice League of the future. The story begins in a way that feels extremely similar to the start of Giffen’s well regarded “Five Years Later” run on “Legion of Super Heroes.” Also, the origin behind this would be league is one that’s very steeped in DC Comics lore, especially Jack Kirby’s contributions. If you’re going to use anyone’s ideas, that’s usually a great place to start.
Tiptoeing around spoiler territory, this league is both familiar and drastically different from the one fans know in love. The driving force for the book’s conflict is rooted in self-identity, destiny, and the nature of myths. Sounds pretty lofty, yeah? While the sci-fi heavy concept has teeth, the execution isn’t without some hitches.
First off, the issue’s pacing is a bit of mess. Giffen and DeMatteis expend considerable effort trying to be enigmatic regarding the nature of this future, the League, and their benefactors, to the detriment of the story’s flow. The occasional clunky use of expository dialogue to reiterate key plot points mucks things up even more.
While the character dynamics are interesting, the dialogue and presentation often feels eerily similar to a VH1 reality show. While there’s nothing inherently wrong with that, it doesn’t quit mesh with the tone set earlier in the issue, and comes off as slightly juvenile. That said, the little bit of levity does keep the comic from being too overly grim.
While the loss of Kevin Maguire still stings, Howard Porter does a terrific job on art. The artist delivers some of his best work in recent memory, calling to mind the work of artists like Kenneth Rocafort. Porter’s energetic action scenes are tons of fun, with characters seemingly running or flying off the page. When things slow down however, Porter’s work looses a lot of that spunk, however. Still, even in the book’s calmer moments his characters are extremely expressive and well designed.
In fact, Porter’s designs for the new Justice League are easily the best part of the issue. Superman and Wonder Woman feature looks very much in line with their current ensembles, although Supermsn’s arguably blows his New 52 look out of the water. Bstman’s look seems like a cross between the Nolan movie suit and the Batman Beyond suit, a winning combo for the Dark Knight. Green Lantern and the Flash mark the biggest departure from their iconic looks, and as such are the most visually interesting. The Flash sports goggles and a bandana, making, while GL looks like a mix between the Spectre and Ragman.
It’s easy to see Giffen and DeMatteis have got big things in mind for “Justice League 3000.” However, they choose to play their cards close to the chest in this first issue, perhaps too close for its own good. It’s hard to peg just what kind of story the duo is trying to tell, or even if the story is one worth telling. One of the greatest complaints leveled against the most recent “Legion” incarnation was how generic it felt, and “Justice League 3000” is in danger of falling into that same snare.
Final Verdict: 6.3 – Browse. It’s a promising start, but “Justice League 3000” has a ways to go before proving its worth and relevancy.
