Try to get two persons to agree totally on anything, and you're in for a 'herding cats' experience. That said, I'm finding myself more and more in disagreement with the conventional wisdom on DC's Countdown.
I'm sorry; I like the series.
Many of the complaints seem focused around the series' slow start. Well, yeah, in the first issue we only had one death (and that was after making us care about a character who's never been on anyone's favorite list).
What I'm seeing is a build-up. The story is, after all, some thousand pages long. It's striking me that it's following the archetypal three-act structure. We're still in the first act; matter of fact, we're still prior to the point where "everything changes".
We've had the opening kicker; now we're getting the introduction of characters and themes, and yes, I'm enjoying seeing things unfold even without lots-o-fighting-guys-in-spandex.
It's not the way 52 was structured, true. 52 was, well, 'busy'. What with four main writers (five if you count Steve Wacker) 52 had a much less structured approach, more a mosaic, and that led to a real 'density' in the book. There was lots crammed in, and because of the piecemeal approach it sometimes seemed as though there was more story there than actually appeared on the page. For example, much as I enjoyed the space heroes storyline, what exactly happened there that couldn't have been told in a 'done in one' issue?
Countdown seems to me to be just hitting it's stride. I don't fault anyone for being left cold by Countdown. It's far different from 52, and isn't everyone's cup-o-tea.
Seeing the reviews of Countdown, I'm kind of motivated to do my own. There's nothing wrong with someone who doesn't like/understand it reviewing it on that basis, but the reviews aren't reflecting my tastes. I believe I'm going to be doing more postings on comics in general, and Countdown in particular, and find out whether anyone agrees with me. Or, for that matter, whether anyone cares.
