“POP” #4 concludes Curt Pires’ and Jason Copland’s critical examination of pop culture.  The series has had its narrative ups and downs, and has invoked more than it has actually said.  But in the end, as a whole, these guys have created a really solid story that is as visually spectacular as it is smart.  “POP” isn’t exactly what I thought it was going to be, but for such a high-concept mini series dealing with the kinds of themes its dealing with, I’m really impressed.  We need more stories like “POP”.

WRITTEN BY: Curt Pires

ART BY: Jason Copland

PUBLISHER: Dark Horse

PRICE: $3.99

RELEASE: November 26, 2014

Reviewed By Eric Switzer

As a reviewer, I try to ascertain the intention of the creators before giving a qualitative assessment of their work.  I want to judge things for what they are, or what they are trying to be, rather than weigh them against the success of other creators or my own expectations of what something ought to be.  The “success” of a book critically lives and dies on one factor: did it accomplish what the creators set out to accomplish?  Did the themes, style, plot, characters, and everything else draw a straight line back to mission statement of the book.  “POP” has been one of the more difficult series for me to critique for reasons that I will get in to.  The answer to the question, did “POP” do what Pires and Copland set out to do, is emphatically yes.  The book is a successful piece of art, and one that I enjoyed thoroughly from beginning to end.

When a new series begins there are an infinite number of possible directions the book could take narratively and thematically.  After reading “POP” #1 and knowing a little bit about Curt and Jason, I expected “POP” to continue examining these themes, addressing cultural phenomenons, and ideally to hold a mirror up to the consumer.  A tall order for a 4-issue miniseries to be sure, and one that ended up being unrealistic.  Instead, Pires chose to focus on character and story over themes and social critique.  My “POP” would have been a different book, but as I said before, objective criticism is about judging art for what it is and not what you want it to be.  This has been difficult as I’ve examined “POP”.

That isn’t to say the themes are present, even pervasive at times.  It is clear that Pires and Copland are inviting us to reflect, but “POP” never really traverses beyond that initial question.  Instead the focus is on our fleeing protagonists, their would-be captors, and the men in charge that make it all happen.  It isn’t an entirely new kind of story, but it is in a sense that the themes sort of serve as a backdrop for the story.

“POP” is a book that encourages you to read deeper.  It almost appears to alternate from straight forward plotting to rich, thematic storytelling, and I really want to believe the message is there, deep within the page.  A lot of my theorizing revolves around the deus ex figure that saves the day and what he represents.  Perhaps it is like the big boss says on the last page, “There are no answers”.

Whether “POP” accomplishes everything it was capable of, or meets my own personal expectations is another issue, and one that is sort of irrelevant outside of this review.  But if nothing else I say resonates with you please pay attention to this: go buy “POP”, read “POP”, talk about “POP”, encourage art like “POP”, be part of this conversation.  I think this kind of media is really important.  “POP” may not be this generation’s “Fight Club”, but it inserts itself into a pretty profound issue.  It deserves your attention.

—

Eric Switzer  is an aspiring filmmaker and screenplay writer living in Los Angeles.  His work tends to focus on the lighter side of entropy, dystopic futures, and man’s innate struggle with his own mortality.  He can be found on twitter @epicswitzer or reached via email at ericswitzerfilm@gmail.com.