I haven't read this issue so I don't have a horse in this race, but I'm having a grand old time reading all of these comments, and I'd just like to point out the irony in you calling other people unintelligent and misspelling a three letter word in the same sentence.

Really? Your argument is "you made a spelling error"? In 2023? Weaaaaaak.

Typical user reviewer who is more concerned with someone else's review than anything else. Over 300 reviews and you have an average score of 9 out of 10? What was so wrong with Hawkgirl #1 that you considered it so below average?

It's not an argument, merely an observation! I just found it amusing that you'd comment on other people's intelligence level and talk about them looking silly immediately after misspelling the word "but" :) And although I'm not entirely sure what it being 2023 has to do with anything, I do commend you for not making any spelling mistakes in your reply to my comment! (Assuming the five extra a's in "weak" were intentional and not another error) Perhaps there's hope for you yet!

2023 - The Year of Poor Spelling! (Or is it “The Yeer of Pour Speling”)

Weird Jim, are you talking to me good sir?

I was - laughing at the fact he excused his poor spelling because it was 2023 - the first comment was directed at Toon though

@ Jim, I stated in myself that I didn't find everything about the issue perfect. My score isn't because I give every book a 9, its because I usually only bother reviewing when I really like a book or a series. And no, a spelling error doesn't change the argument, now that others have chimed in clearly no one has contested my conclusion. So it seems I was on the money.

@tron, is this a confession? Because there are grammatical errors in your comment and spelling errors. When you're referring to a subject action you use "you're" not "your". Now this is your argument, not mine. But given you dont offer much else what am I to conclude from this?

No one has actually contested that they were sent here because it is true... "free thinkers" when an internet personality tells them what to think, I suppose.

@WeirdScienceJim Ah yes, I had a good laugh over that as well! Literacy was so 2022. I guess I just need to get with the times.

@Toonstrack, "No one has said I am wrong, therefore I am right." Really? That's the argument you're going with? In 2023??

@marvvel no, I'm right because what I'm saying is correct, and the fact no one is denying it is because it's correct and they know it is correct. You see how that works? @tron compelling argument, however I am not wrong. Have you even read the issue? Be honest. You can say if you haven't.

No, it's not reasonable to call a book bad because it and has a gay character. Thats as laughable as calling a book bad because it has a dwarf, or a little person. It makes no sense and has no bearing on a books quality. If you dont like this story being told thats reasonable. Not liking that this book doesn't reflect your idealized reality is juvenile. The book was attacked simple for featuring an original gay character when thats what yall have been saying they SHOULD do. Double standards.

I mean, I should rephrase that it is "acceptable" as in one is allowed to do it, but it is certainly not rational, or reasonable. I dont like smoking, but I would not call a book bad because a character in it smokes. That would be ridiculous.

Nothing was propaganda. They never said "you should be this way" or anything. No one even makes a statement about it. If you consider the very presence of people with a different lifestyle as propaganda, that means you have an inherent bias against their presence. Because presence isn't a statement. Its presented in a passive matter of fact manner and did wasn't even advertised before release.

So your comparison is a false equivalence. Gay people exist, so at this point, its more of a statement to actively avoid showing them around. No message is being sent, simply a story is being told. It may be a little distracting because it wasn't always the norm but thats fine. I understand the world changes and people change and views change, and I don't have to gave them all agree with me in order to enjoy a work.

Thats a bit dramatic. And review bombing rhe book on this site is not even a normal or rational response especially when, it isn't actively advertising anything and it isn't even being judge as a full book. Im telling you many here didn't even end it but just followed someone who pointed them in a direction and said go. Its the exact opposite of how art critics should be.

These people live a very miserable life man, it's sad

@toon - there was no review bombing - the original thing you were talking about - the person mentioning Gabe Hernandez - was a reviewer who said they were surprised that they actually agreed with gabe (meaning they usually don’t) about the book! You need better reading comprehension. As for the issue : it’s a hawkgirl book, yet Axlrod is more interested in pushing her own character, Galaxy, who saves the day and has everyone talking about her while Hawkgirl is written very unlikeable

General ck (who has 1451 reviews) said “ Wow, I'm actually agreeing with Gabe Hernandez for once!” That’s not review bombing - gabe hernandez has an Critic Review on this site - that’s why the guy mentioned him!

@jim The book remains a hawkgirl book lol. No one in the book discusses galaxy beyond a single page of batman reviewing her origin. The rest is about hawkgirl and setting up the villain. It might not he directly from Gabe, but its very clear some of these reviews didn't even bother reading the issue just based on their vagueness and incorrect details.

To those in this thread, Toon is not an honest actor. They constantly attack people, and when people respond to defend themselves, they say that is a win for them because no one called out their own poor arguments. Even in my comment where I laid out the pages and the artistic choices that I disagreed with, they made baseless accusations. I think this should just remain an agree to disagree situation. Toon can think its an 8.5 and most other people can think it is sub 5. That is fair.

It is so much more about Galaxy - more background info for Galaxy than Hawkgirl (who is in need of a definitive background with the new open timeline), Galaxy saves Hawkgirl and stops the threat the other heroes can’t and we end up with Hawkgirl crashing unconcious into… Galaxy’s apartment !

The villain is intriguing - I just hope we get more of her and Hawgirl and less of a Galaxy push going forward. Overall though, I don’t think this book will be in the top 200 by issue #3

The heroes were beating up the guys before galaxy ever got there tho, like, they were winning pretty handily except for when hawkgirl took a shot not meant for her. I frankly don't need a book to be in the top 200... and I'm willing to wait and see how the story develops and if they wrap the villain in. I think we all want to he able to enjoy it; so hopefully the reuslt is positive.

I have to say I've enjoyed this comment thread more than this opening issue which isn't great and isn't terrible, in my humble opinion. The art is excellent but the writing left me disappointed, mainly because Kendra is written as pretty unlikeable. And yes, there is clearly a big Galaxy push by the writer/creator. Let's see how issue #2 pans out.

The funniest thing in this comment thread is seeing the weird science guy pretend weird science is legitimate when we all know it's the dregs of comic book criticism.

The irony of having a V avatar and saying this. Alan Moore was that one trick pony in the 80s.

Yo Toons, keep it up. Keep being positive with comics. Having a high rating isn't a bad thing. It means you are enjoying the medium unlike a lot of those who just come here to review bomb, hate read or attack creators. Its people like you that keep the comic industry afloat, not these degens that site behind screens and yell into an echo chamber about how their politics are making them pariahs when it's their words and actions that are just outdated and miserable. I'm genuinely glad you liked it

I don't think it's hateful. It's literally hateful comments and reviews. Your ill-fitting mask seems to be falling in front of your eyes and blocking your view of the obvious bigots and hate mongers.

You are hateful and mean. Or at the very least side with those who are up front about it and don't feign to hide behind the imagery or ideals of someone they don't understand. "Woke-ism" is a fear created and perpetuated by YOU and those you side with because you hate change. Hate the idea of gender/sexual/racial equality and think that any representation is some sort of mandatory ramming. You don't have to read this. Nor do you have to continue your tired tirade on any comment section you see.

I also kept it vague. Not mentioning any particular person or group. Just that the nebulous review bombers and hateful echo chamber members were the ones that are insufferable. YOU put yourself in that camp by assuming I meant you and essentially rug pulling yourself. Good job mate. Cheerio!

You insinuate that I didn't take your message's meaning by repeating what you said as if I hadn't addressed it. I did. To you and your V persona. Seems I was right that the mask slipped in front of your eyes because you clearly had a hard time reading it. Under no uncertain terms did I dodge or misconstrue what you said. "Don't shit on those who don't cause you think it's hateful and mean." I told you that you were clearly blind to those who are blatantly mean and hateful. Reading comprehension?

So self righteous to be pro-equality. If only no one gave a shit like you don't, we'd all be chill. Apathy is just bigotry with an extra step. If you are bothered by the existence of caring, then you clearly are predisposed to the position of being against it.

The brain disease of centrism is borne from a basic lack of comprehension about the very topics you throw yourself into in every comment thread. Read up, learn and come back when you can make an argument that's not just obsessing over having things shoved down your throat.

Art is inherently political. And comic books are art. The reason we bring up your V avatar is that you constantly complain about politics in comics yet you rep the main character of The Political Comic™. It just shows that you have a bias towards left leaning politics, and it's not simply politics as a whole, and that you were too stupid to understand or haven't read V for Vendetta.

Thanks for caring @amazing Psycamorean! I love that we have almost identical overall ratings for the reviews, but that doesn't matter I guess

"Apathy is just bigotry with an extra step." Lmao. If only the anointed intellectuals within the education system were more in line with the likes of Thomas Sowell there would be far less empty platitudes and divisive rhetoric from clueless far-left millennials churned out of their propaganda machine.

Thomas Sowell is an idiot that conservatives parrot around to appear not racist. They found the one black guy with enough survivorship bias to make Bill Cosby blush, and they shove him out there in a desperate attempt to excuse their racist rhetoric. He sounds smart to people with no comprehension skills, and no one else. He's a joke.

I don't think he's an Uncle Tom, I think he's a pickme. Similar to someone like Candace Owens. Someone who dislikes their own group and therefore tries to appeal as other.

Jesus Christ you're racist. People like him because he's intelligent and studied under Milton Friedman, not because he's black. What a weasel you are.

Well, no. People don't like him because he's intelligent, because what he says is, in fact, stupid. They like him because he gives credence to their biases, which are racist. How does he do that? By saying racist things about black people while being black, and dressing those things up as intellectual thinking, which adds to their credibility among the stupid.

The real racist is the one who agrees with and believes racist things, even when black people say them. Thomas Sowell, for instance, is a giant critic of affirmative action, which I assume you agree with since you're criticizing the education system. Affirmative action is a good thing for minorities; it recognizes the socioeconomic imbalance between the different races due to a history of segregation, bigotry and violence.

It allows people who otherwise would be stuck in their station to rise beyond it, instead of continuing a cycle of poverty that would otherwise be impossible to escape. The people against affirmative action are racist people, and Thomas Sowell is one of them.

Agreeing with Gabe? 100% sus!

Gaalxy doesn't do all the work lol? Like 4 or 5 superheroes were beating these guys before her. No one even reacts to galaxy or says she's better than anyone. You're projecting. Hawkgirl, particularly Kendra has always been a moody character in the comics lol. You clearly don't even know this character. Who sent you?

I will site the pages as to why you are wrong. Firstly: I know Hawkgirl. Best Hawkgirl, TV JL. Tldr: She was inspiring. Moody is incorrect. She is brave, she inspires, she throws some awesome sass. In book: Other heroes, Superman, PG, BC. They all belong. By page 6 Hawkgirl is poorly written Raven moody already. By page 11 Galaxy shows and is the focus. She 'makes inert' and entire wave of soldiers, wtf? Pg 15 word salad, Pg 21 more fanning on Galaxy. Out of space to reply, but this issueisweak

Hawkgirl LITERALLY was told by someone that she inspired her in this story, but she also has a lot of past trauma and wonders if she belongs. Thoze are mutually exclusive. Galaxy was able to beat them because they are energy based and she controls forms of energy. This is literally explained. Then she's gone from the issue til the end. Nothig you're saying makes sense.

Do you not question why Axelrod make these artist choice? This book doesnt deserve more than a 5 just based on some egregious marks of a poor writer: 1) Most of the book is talking and saying what is going on/why things are happening, not showing 2) 2nd Character overshadows Hawkgirl. Axelrod made an active choice to put in enemies that are specifically weak to Galaxys poorly defined powerset (and I am referring to her original series here), to make her appear OP.

Axelrod has made several choices which reflect poorly on Hawkgirl. When a writer puts in an OC character, they better be darn good. Galaxy does not merit being in this book. Replace her in the scenes with Superman/PowerGirl doing the heavy lifting. It for one makes more sense and two, wouldnt change the story much. Lastly you keep saying no one is refuting your points. Well I am. This is a terrible character exploration start. Focus on her already established relationships and herownpsychosis

You clearly don't know Hawkgirl. Would you have a problem with 3 straight characters?

I don't think slice of life belongs in here at all. They indtroduce a new character adn we immediately have to know she's gay within two pages. I just don't think it's necessary. And that's back-to-back with another unnecessary scene of her meeting with a former college friend who openly says she's gay and complains about marrying a man. There was absolutely no reason for that scene. It goes nowhere and feels like a self-insert. Maybe I don't know everything about HG-but I know I don't like this

The red hair belongs to Shayera, not Kendra. And the story is not centered around lesbians, there's plenty more than that to read

Well, you enjoy it. It's just not for me.

Why did you read this book? You clearly aren't aware of this version of Hawkgirl. It literally says in the description it's Kendra. She's been like this for a long time, not Shayera. I have to believe you much like most of the bigot brigade came here because you all collectively march to the same hateful drum because gay people bother you and no other reason.

I didn’t read it. What’s the gender/sexuality stuff in it?

Well, there's this girl with a half shaven head who meets Kendra and she says she's gay, that she might not be a woman, which is moronic. There's some sort of panel with a BLM protest, someone yelling "f*** you, cops". Then this girl asks Kendra if she has a shot with her, Kendra backs out, though I can guarantee they're gonna get hooked up later somehow. Then we cut to another lesbian couple. What the hell does this fanfic have to do with this story?

@ebonyc I am probably further left than you, but still pretty in the middle. Having said that, I have found that many stories in comics these days feel like horrible fan fiction. It’s like the publishers do not understand how to find creators who understand the craft or even what works. It’s clear by the many bad reviews here that people were disappointed.

@JBL Reviews - I like to think I'm not an extremist. I've been tolerant all my life, but I'm getting a bit annoyed of what's being pushed today. Unfortunately, this comic book is ideology first, story second or third. I've read comics that had either left or right ideology in it, but it wasn't dominant. I could tell they wanted to tell a good story first and sprinkled in some of their beliefs like a lot of writers do. Unfortunately, this comic is about the writer's griefs, not Hawkgirl.

@JBL Reviews - The way you're interacted with me tells me you're not an extremist either and I appreciate and agree with your opinion. Some people would've addressed me with all kinds of "-phobe" words. Maybe it's harsh to call it "trash", but it certainly feels like that's what this is.

@thecimmerian Oh there's certainly more bad than I've said.

@ebonyc Haha I hope I’m not extreme for either side. I do wonder if, month by month, current comics are no longer for me. They seem to have been co-opted by a group that I can’t seem to identify with, and that’s outside of some the issues you brought up.

Lol you didn't even read the issue . You didn't even mentioned several elements of the comic. You were sent here by an internet pundit like a sheep.

They didn't read it because they didn't read it lol. His review doesn't mention a single thing about the comic. He was sent here, he had no interest in this from the start but got invested because of his politics. Its obvious.

I think people are quick to call you any sort of "-phobe" because somehow you always manage to find and review issues that have LGBTQIA+ characters or some sort of progressive message and review bomb it. Not really the most unbiased track record man.

Straight up saying, "I like to think I'm not an extremist," while having posted about how you think two people kissing made you stop reading a book because it's gross, digging on diverse character representation and any sort of racial inequality being depicted all while using the Alt-Right thesaurus really paints you in a singular light.

@toonscrap I did read it. I even gave quotes from it. Try harder. You use non arguments like always. Given hoe you didn't recognize what I said was in this comic book, you probably didn't read it yourself. Your trolling is washed up.

@tron thats not even what this book did tho! I mean, it literally just has characters appear. At no point do they turn to the audience and divulge the virtues of homosexuality lmfao. Your analogy is a false equivalence. If Ben wrote a book about a character I like, and a republican christian appears in it, I'm not gonna call the book bad just because if that lol.

A writer should be restricted from including characters they like in their own book? I guess someone should tell zdarsky that since he primarily focused on tim Drake Robin as batman sidekick in his run, because of preference. Or when bendis routinely picks a character, often an oc to push in his books. If she wants to add representation to er stories thats whatever as long as the books are good. Im not attaching value to the writers preferred character treatment. I'm attaching it to the quality.

And the crazy thing is, this book was just decent. It wasn't high tier in the writing cale either. And I have said that, I think its fine to not love the story direction. My issue is when people attach it to their politics, and that is objectively what most of these reviewers are actually doing. It then becomes irrelevant what the quality of the book is. Thats my issue with it. But honestly you seem more reasonable than some others. So we can end it here if you wish