REVIEWS

Archie #1

Archie1retroUnless you’ve worked at a comic store for at least a minute, your opinions about what matters in Comics: The Marketplace are sorely lacking, so listen here to a guy who doesn’t know how to do anything in life but man the till. Aside from one Mr. Wayne Esquire, there’s no higher profile brand in the medium than Archie, and there won’t be until Marvel comes out with a comic called “Marvel”. I’ve seen it just about every day of my life for the past decade: if you keep a good selection of Riverdale’s finest teens front and center. the moms (and more than a few dads) will every one of them let out a sound like they farted audibly in familiar company and then say “They still make Archie?” Meanwhile the little girls (and more than a few little boys) don’t wait for assurances. Whether or not they know what the hell is going on with Jughead or Dilton or the Pussycats, those little digests are like magnets: covers meet eyes, newsprint meets hands, and those sweet dollars meet the bottom of the cash register with nary a word spoken. And just for good measure the moms and dads will buy one to dream of idylls past if the kids aren’t around.

It’s impossible not to admire Archie Comics, both the books and the brand. If you think superhero nerds are the apex of slavish devotion, you haven’t been checking out the unbridled loyalty that the Andrews-Cooper-Lodge folie a trois has kept boiling in the world’s elementary schoolers since your grandma was prowling the newsstands clutching dimes. Instead of clinging to a single group of ever-aging consumers that grows ever more Nixonian in their reactionary tastes (like superhero comics have for the past 40 years), the good folks at Archie have had the common sense to stick to a single demographic, like comics used to do when they actually sold. Kids from 6 to 11 read Archie now just like they always have, and the seeds of nostalgia those goofy little books implant are so fertile that they’re the only books in the store a large percentage of parents will even attempt to grapple with. Archie is the Pixar of comics, a bona fide multi-generational consumer bauble that pumps out pabulum so smooth and generic that all the captive audience can do is beg for more of the same.

Still, even though more of the same is the majority of what rolls off the production lines (the digests contain many, many more reprints than they do original works), there’s labor and smarts that go into these things. The brilliantly color-matched covers make for the slickest-looking line put out by any comics publisher bar none, the price-to-content ratio is unbeatable, and no idiom of cartoon drawing telegraphs pure unalloyed FUN and EXCITEMENT better than the pop-eyed, baking soda-smiling style pioneered by Dan DeCarlo and Harry Lucey, among hundreds more uncredited, screwed-over dead dudes. If I had to compare Archie to other consumer objects, it wouldn’t be to shit like X-Men or Superman comics -- those veer wildly from the transcendent to the ridiculously ugly and objectionable, depending on who’s involved and what’s going on in the stories, a problem the Archies neatly leapfrog. No, Archie comics are more like Pepto-Bismol or Coca Cola, a single mighty formula that’s been unchanged for years, that not everybody is going to need everyday (or ever), but that is absolutely the cure for a specific ailment, namely being seven years old and curious about Luv, or wanting to remember what it felt like when that’s what you were. They are flawless, crystalline, ruthlessly competent objects that still show evidence in every element of every panel of having an origin in the human hand, and they contain a beauty all their own, even if they’re kinda dumb. And they sell like a motherfucker, to all kinds of, uh, motherfuckers, who will never buy any other kind of comic book in their lives. These are the only examples of sequential art that transcend not just comic stores, but bookstores entirely. If you want to talk about gaining readers for comics, Archie is front-line on the grocery checkout counters and airport kiosks of America, cheesing so hard it looks like he knows the answer to a pop-quiz question everybody else has forgotten.

Recently, the Archies have taken the rather admirable step of updating themselves for the 21st century, something their rivals south of Riverdale at Marvel and DC don’t seem to have even registered is an option. “Diversity, diversity, diversity -- that’s our world now. The world I live in is a very diversified world. The world my kids grew up in is very accepting of everybody and everything, and that’s what Riverdale is now -- it’s very accepting of everybody and everything,” sez Archie CEO Jon Goldwater of the line’s recent efforts to include gay, disabled, and multi-racial characters that all the other characters don’t make a big huge deal out of on the page. Fuckin’ A, Jon, and good on yuh! Like it or not, in a world where most people have forgotten that superheroes weren’t invented by Josh Whedon, Archie is the public face of comics, and it’s pretty cool that they’re not shitting all over themselves like the cape and cowl guys do on a pretty regular basis.

Unfortunately, the nature of the beast dictates that everyone’s favorite redhead go in search of new territory to conquer now that a couple internet articles about how Archie still exists have surfaced in response to all that diversity diversity diversity. The legions of Archie readers and soon-to-be-readers out there already don’t need these writeups to find the comics, of course -- they’re everywhere, and connoisseurs of low-hanging thinkpieces are the world’s least likely actual comic book buyers (they will come in and look around for a long-ass time though). On the other hand, I’ll be the first to tell you that seeing your name printed on a glowing computer screen is serious boner fuel, and while they’ll never stop doing what they do best the Archie guys seem to agree. And so a new version of Archie has slouched forth like a redheaded Justin Bieber, focus grouped and primed to appeal to a bold new demographic: dudes who like comic books! Wait… huh?

The sad truth is that as big-minded as the folks behind Archie Comics have proved they can be over the past few years, the first issue of the new Archie reboot series (officially Archie volume 2 number 1) represents a staggering failure of imagination. Rather than shooting for the moon and creating something that might flop hard, but also might stand a chance of appealing to the millions of Cosmo and Elle readers* who still shop at the same newsstands the Riverdale gang inhabits the bottom shelves of, Goldwater & co. have become another episode in comics’ history of battered-spouse syndrome, rushing masochistically into the questionable embrace of the direct-sales market and Marvel/DC/Image readers on the lookout for the next thing that ign.com is gonna write about. Small pond (and it is one hell of a small pond) aside, these are the same guys who have spent their lives rejecting Archie comics, the same guys Archie has proven decade after decade that they don’t need. But hey, these are also the guys who have proven that you literally can’t make something bad enough for them to stop reading, so out roll the 21 (!) variant covers and mealy-mouthed articles on specialty-interest websites. Here comes Archie, and he’s totally not something a seven year old girl would read! Unless she was as smart and cool as you of course, and knew that now she has to look for the same thing she’s been reading for a year or two on the grown-up shelf in between Ant-Man and Avengers Undercover.

Mail AttachmentThe comic itself? Well, nobody who’ll read it will give a shit, but I guess it’s… ok? Archie comics have made merciless ok-ness such a cardinal virtue for the last half-century that that’s a complement, but really, once you hop onto the same weird, nowhere-else-but-here rack that hosts Alan Moore on the high end and Dan Didio on the low, the well-oiled competence of Archie, Jughead and the gang just isn’t very notable in any way.

Seasoned mainstream-comics vets Fiona Staples and Mark Waid turn in a readable story with little bits of flash and dazzle thrown in here and there to make sure you remember that this is a New Archie, but nothing fun or interesting enough to break the mold.

Waid’s plot whips through the paces seamlessly enough, but his dialogue sounds like a 50 year old man telling a story about some teenage kids he saw while his daughter was shopping at the mall to an appreciative audience of other 50 year old men. Staples pulls off a few funny gestures and neat facial expressions, but the figures are so stiff it looks like everyone’s clothes got a quintuple dose of starch in the washer, and the backgrounds are so anonymous and featureless they make Lucey’s trad-Archie environments look like Moebius by comparison. Letterer Jack Morelli contributes the issue’s finest moments, a few emoji-inspired word balloons and a nifty visualization of music being played both badly and well. The big cliffhanger is that next issue will almost definitely feature the introduction of Veronica, so, you know, c’mon back in 30… or whatever.

Mail Attachment2It’s pretty clear the creators give exactly as much of a shit as their audience - a nice paycheck and resume-pad on one end, a nice attempt at pretending to try something new before getting back down to the serious business of parsing Secret Wars on the other. Welcome to Riverdale, where everything is super great and nothing ever changes besides a mild, creeping shittiness -- just like comics! Take your time looking around, I’ll be over here selling the old-school Archies to people who are actually excited to read them… you know, before they grow out of it and don’t come back, or come back one time 30 years later to the same thing and then remember why they left in the first place, namely that this stuff is pretty stupid.

* (One of these Cosmo and Elle readers, a lovely lady in her mid-30s, informed me at the bar I so desperately needed to hit up directly after I finished drafting this review that she had actually, quite by happenstance, seen and read the new Archie. “Not as good as the old Archie… I mean, not even close,” was the verbatim review.)


12 Responses to Archie #1

  1. Brad C says:

    What did you think of the inclusion of the very first Archie story at the end? I think it only reinforced how unambitious the main issue was. Taking something wacky and making it “realistic” seems like the shallow end of the ‘creativity’ pool. But yet it’s eaten up like candy by grownups that want to enjoy children’s fare without shame.

    On comicbookroundup.com right now there are 34 reviews of Archie #1 with an average score of 9.4, the lowest score being an 8.0. To alter your quote, these people continue to prove that you literally can’t make anything so mediocre that they won’t treat it like it’s created by Kirby’s ghost.

  2. Matt Seneca says:

    I was gonna comment on that – the “look how much better the old comic in the back is” line is always tempting – but really, it isn’t much better. The drawing has more life and the story’s more charming, but I’m not really willing to ascribe that charm to anything but seeing an artifact of a past time. What I really admire about Archie is the formula, and in that first appearance story it hasn’t been developed at all yet. The drawing’s like a mutant version of the Archie everybody knows, and Veronica isn’t in that one either. There’s way better old Archie out there… though yes, that old story is indeed better than the new one it shares the comic with.

    It was hella funny when Archie put his head through the painting of HIMSELF that that crusty old dude was gonna hang in his house though.

  3. Brad C says:

    I’ll admit ignorance to the Archie formula, so I can’t comment on that. But I actually giggled at some of the stuff in the 1st appearance. I think the only part I thought was funny in the Waid/Staples one was the dude cursing at Siri. And how joyless and creepy Jughead looked.

    The Waid one starts with a PAGES of 4th wall breaking exposition monologue. In recounting it to my friend I almost yelled out ‘show don’t tell mutha****er’.

  4. Great review-you get Archie in a major way. It seems like this issue is exactly what I expected it was going to be: an Archie comic written for teens by a guy in his 50s. By which I mean, senseless and lacking in charm.

  5. Nate A. says:

    Excellent review!

  6. Eric Reynolds says:

    This was a great piece. I’m a 44 year-old man, I have no interest in Archie, but the new “ish” crossed my desk so I shared it — without commentary — with my wife, who read Archie growing up and has a certain nostalgia for it. She gave it back with a sad look on her face and said, “This is creepy.” The unequivocal enthusiasm from fandom only serves to confuse me.

  7. EH says:

    Old Archie– repeatedly cited as a major influence by the Hernandez brothers.

  8. R. Fiore says:

    Any change in a formula is a tacit admission that the formula doesn’t work anymore. But you know, it’s hard to believe that there haven’t been enough Archie comics in the world by now.

  9. Rob Barrett says:

    My ten year old daughter liked it well enough to ask for a subscription.

  10. Cut Both Ways says:

    “The legions of Archie readers and soon-to-be-readers out there already don’t need these writeups to find the comics, of course — they’re everywhere, and connoisseurs of low-hanging thinkpieces are the world’s least likely actual comic book buyers (they will come in and look around for a long-ass time though). On the other hand, I’ll be the first to tell you that seeing your name printed on a glowing computer screen is serious boner fuel, and while they’ll never stop doing what they do best the Archie guys seem to agree. And so a new version of Archie has slouched forth like a redheaded Justin Bieber, focus grouped and primed to appeal to a bold new demographic: dudes who like comic books! Wait… huh?”

    “Here comes Archie, and he’s totally not something a seven year old girl would read!”

    This article can keep reassuring itself that Archie comics are “everywhere” being read by “legions,” but keeping the series alive is a 24/7 mission in the face of flagging sales, beyond the timeline of this thinkpiece-as-review. Count me in with Rob as having passed the comic by younger eyes that enjoyed reading it just fine.

    There’s also terribly little mention of Jughead in this review, and everyone knows it’s dangerous to count him out.

    “Rather than shooting for the moon and creating something that might flop hard, but also might stand a chance of appealing to the millions of Cosmo and Elle readers* who still shop at the same newsstands the Riverdale gang inhabits the bottom shelves of…”

    They quantum-married Archie to both of his franchise loves then murdered him with a gun (a popular arc!). Then had to follow that act.

  11. Saber Tooth Tiger Mike says:

    “Waid’s plot whips through the paces seamlessly enough, but his dialogue sounds like a 50 year old man telling a story about some teenage kids he saw while his daughter was shopping at the mall to an appreciative audience of other 50 year people” One could interpret your review as a cranky 50 year old man discussing a comic book with other 50 year old men that is yet another sign of What’s Wrong with Comics. ” You keep reassuring the reader, that Archie comics are “everywhere” and sell well, even better than the niche superhero stuff, which would make the changes Archie, the publisher, is making, inexplicable. Your notion that Archie, the publisher, is trying to appeal to the ign.com and the current superhero comic book crowd is laughable. They are using gimmicky tactics to maximize sales wherever they can…which is a sign of a business trying to expand or stay afloat. Maybe, the formula that’s worked for decades isn’t working anymore. Maybe Archie comics’ demographics are getting closer to people your age, and while Archie may want to exploit that older audience , which has more disposable income, with variants and with things like ” Archie vs Predator” , they might actually want to get back to their ideal core audience.

    Their ideal core audience is probably under 16 which, despite all your profonicating, you don’t know anything more about than Archie, Mark Waid, and Fiona Staples. There also seems to be a sharp generational divide with, those under 16, seeming to enjoy the new Archie comic based on the comments made on your review.

    Let’s look at Eric, one of your most ardent supporters:
    “I’m a 44 year-old man, I have no interest in Archie, but the new “ish” crossed my desk so I shared it — without commentary — with my wife, who read Archie growing up and has a certain nostalgia for it. She gave it back with a sad look on her face and said, “This is creepy.” The unequivocal enthusiasm from fandom only serves to confuse me.
    Where’s this enthusiasm coming from? There’s curiosity…as there is with every new #1 with superhero fanboys, but not enthusiasm or support. Your anecdote proves that absolutely no changes to anything can be made without making someone feel uncomfortable.

  12. Matt Seneca says:

    i’m 25

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *