I like that one of the big thesis statements of Ewing’s “X-Men” work is about conflict and reconciliation.

A comic largely set in a martial combat-driven society, Ewing’s “X-Men” is in large part about accepting one's self.

Neatly mirroring his “Immortal Hulk.”

(Resurrection of Magneto #3.)

Magneto, a Holocaust survivor, taking a monument of the immeasurable dead and fashioning it into a weapon.

I do wonder if maybe (just maybe) there is some subtle (very subtle) subtext here.

(Resurrection of Magneto #2.)

And, at the end of the Krakoan era, Ewing returns to one of the central anxieties of the period, the fear that the consolidating that sort of power is inherently corrupting - that one cannot wield such power without being in some way compromised by it.

(X-Men Red #13.)

At the end of Krakoa, Ewing returns to one of Hickman’s big thematic ideas of the era.

Separation.

Krakoa and Arrako. Apocalyptic and Genesis. Erik and Charles. Mars and Earth. Mutants and humans.

Broken, fragmented worlds.

(Heralds of Apocalypse #1.)

I like the thematic bookend of Ewing’s “X-Men” saga by returning to the destruction of Arrako by Amenth, obviously paralleling the fate of Krakoa.

The idea that paradise exists only to be torn asunder, that it is the nature of utopia to collapse.

(Heralds of Apocalypse #1.)

It’s just really good, unshowy structural stuff from Gillen, Ewing and Spurrier, which feels like it is a logical extension of what Hickman was doing with “House of x” and “Powers of X.”

Narratives that can fit together in different ways to create new context.

(StaB #1.)

You can read Ewing’s tie-in issues to “Judgment Day” in the context of the event, and they work in the themes and narrative of the big event.

But you can read them in the omnibus and they’re just part of the ongoing narrative of “X-Men: Red.”

That’s very deft.

(X-Men: Red #7.)

On a technical level, it is remarkable writing of these monthly comics, where each issue is not only its own thing, but also has to fit both the narrative of the crossover and the narrative of the series.

So it can be read in either context and make sense.

(X-Men: Red #6.)

The "X-Men by Al Ewing" Omnibus bounces from "King in Black" to "The Last Annihilation" to "the Hellfire Gala" to "Judgment Day" to "Sins of Sinister" to "Fall of X."

That should just continually kill the book's momentum. But, somehow it does not.

(S.W.O.R.D. #3.)

On paper, it is everything that is wrong with modern comics, and in the hands of a lesser writer would turn the book into a collection of strange narrative zigs and zags.

“This happened” and then “this happened”, bouncing from one massive crossover event to the next.

(X-Men: Red #5.)

I do not!

And, finally, "Christy" is... fine.

It a solid execution of a really compelling true story that demonstrates Sidney Sweeney has good creative impulses but also maybe the limits of her abilities.

Chad L. Coleman's Don King steals the show.

I also was really charmed by "Pillion", which does a wonderful job of being both graphic and sweet in its depiction of a submissive relationship between a shy boy and a biker.

Two great lead performances from Melling and Skarsgård, with surprising gentleness and tenderness.

I also had a lovely time with David Freyne's "Eternity", a romantic comedy about a woman who is reunited with both of her husbands in the afterlife and has to decide how to spend eternity.

Very sweet, sincere and earnest with a wonderful central trio of Olsen, Teller and Turner.

James Cameron voice: "It's one metric fuck tonne of Red Hulks."